Download Service Brand Avoidance

Service
Brand
Avoidance
A qualitative study of the drivers in
the service industry
BACHELOR THESIS WITHIN: Business Administration
NUMBER OF CREDITS: 15 ECTS
PROGRAMME OF STUDY: Marketing Management
AUTHOR: Ludvig Löfgren and Anna Östlund
TUTOR: Johan Larsson
JÖNKÖPING May, 2016
Acknowledgement
The authors express sincere gratitude and wish to thank the following persons for
their contribution of support, in order to realise this thesis.
Johan Larsson, Licentiate in Economics and Business Administration
who served as the tutor and has been valuable in several ways for the authors when
writing the thesis. He has also been the leader of the seminars and supported us in
keeping the time frame.
Anna-Sara Holmström, Moa Forsberg, Therese Almqvist, Anna Hellberg, Joanna
Melander, Amy Vong, William Johansson, Johan Pehrsson and Nikolay Nikolov
All who have been a part of the seminar group and through both positive and negative
feedback helped us along the way.
Adele Berndt, PhD and Associate Professor in Business Administration
with her interest in our work and availability to help us when needed contributed
great value for the authors in the process.
At last, the authors wish to thank all the participants of the interviews who
contributed with valuable information making it possible to go through with this
thesis.
______________________
Ludvig Löfgren
_______________________
Anna Östlund
Jönköping International Business School
May 2016
i
Bachelor Thesis in Business Administration
Title:
Service Brand Avoidance
Authors:
Ludvig Löfgren and Anna Östlund
Tutor:
Johan Larsson
Date:
2016-05-23
Key Words:
Service Brand Avoidance, Brand Avoidance, Consumer
Behaviour, Anti-Consumption, Brand Relationship
Abstract
Background
Branding is a significant asset for a company, and can provide a firm with sole
association and a special meaning for the consumer. Consumer research generally
stresses the idea of positive consumption of brands and a gap in the consumer
behaviour studies regarding brand avoidance can be exemplified. Subsequently,
brand avoidance has recently received more attention, as the importance to identify
what brands consumers deliberately avoid is as valuable to recognize. In order to get
a more comprehensive image of the market, the relevance to examine the drivers of
service brand avoidance has been identified.
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the drivers of why people deliberately
avoid certain service brands. Based upon the purpose, three questions have been
framed: What are the drivers of brand avoidance in the service industry? How can the
drivers identified connect to previous research, primarily made by Lee et al. (2009b)
and later revised by Knittel et al. (2016)? Is it possible to draw conclusions regarding
all services?
Method
The thesis is mainly exploratory in its nature due to the insights that is required in
order to investigate people’s behaviour. The data has been collected through 16 semistructured interviews where participants have shared their stories connected to
service brand avoidance. The data has then been interpreted and in most cases been
connected to previous literature.
Conclusion
Most consumers avoid several types of service brands, both deliberately and
unconsciously. The findings from interviews have been connected to previous
literature, but also some new conclusions have been made regarding the service
industry. Five categories with sub-themes have been identified and linked to earlier
studies by Lee et al. (2009b) and Knittel et al. (2016); experiential, identity, moral,
deficit-value, and marketing avoidance. The findings show a deeper knowledge of
brand avoidance but solely in the service industry.
ii
Table of Contents
1 Introduction ............................................................................ 1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
Background ........................................................................................ 1
Problem Discussion .......................................................................... 1
Purpose and Research Questions ................................................... 3
Delimitation ........................................................................................ 3
2 Theoretical Framework .......................................................... 4
2.1 Services .............................................................................................. 4
2.2 Critical Issues of Services ................................................................ 4
2.3 Avoiding Consumption ..................................................................... 6
2.3.1 Anti-Consumption........................................................................... 6
2.3.2 The Undesired Self ........................................................................ 6
2.3.3 Boycott ........................................................................................... 7
2.4 Brand Avoidance ............................................................................... 7
2.5 Brand Avoidance Framework ........................................................... 8
2.5.1 Experiential Avoidance................................................................... 8
2.5.2 Identity Avoidance .......................................................................... 9
2.5.3 Moral Avoidance .......................................................................... 11
2.5.4 Deficit-value Avoidance................................................................ 11
2.5.5 Advertising ................................................................................... 12
3 Methodology ......................................................................... 14
3.1 Research Design.............................................................................. 14
3.2 Research Approach ......................................................................... 15
3.2.1 Abductive Approach ..................................................................... 15
3.2.2 Qualitative Approach .................................................................... 16
3.3 Data Collection Method ................................................................... 16
3.3.1 Semi-structured Interviews ........................................................... 17
3.4 Sampling Selection .......................................................................... 17
3.4.1 Convenience Sampling ................................................................ 18
3.4.2 Sampling Size .............................................................................. 18
3.5 Data Collection Process .................................................................. 19
3.6 Data Analysis Process .................................................................... 20
3.7 Trustworthiness ............................................................................... 20
4 Empirical Findings ............................................................... 23
4.1 General Findings ............................................................................. 23
4.2 Drivers of Brand Avoidance............................................................ 24
4.2.1 Experiential Avoidance................................................................. 24
4.2.2 Identity Avoidance ........................................................................ 26
4.2.3 Moral Avoidance .......................................................................... 28
4.2.4 Deficit-value Avoidance................................................................ 29
4.2.5 Marketing Avoidance.................................................................... 31
5 Analysis ................................................................................ 33
34
5.1 Experiential Avoidance ................................................................... 34
5.1.1 Poor Service Performance ........................................................... 35
5.1.2 Servicescape ............................................................................... 36
iii
5.1.3 Inconvenience .............................................................................. 36
5.2 Identity Avoidance ........................................................................... 37
5.2.1 Negative Reference Group .......................................................... 37
5.2.2 Brand Image ................................................................................ 38
5.2.3 Deindividuation ............................................................................ 38
5.3 Moral Avoidance .............................................................................. 39
5.3.1 Anti-hegemony ............................................................................. 39
5.3.2 Ethical Issues ............................................................................... 39
5.3.3 Cultural Dependency.................................................................... 40
5.3.4 Political Engagement ................................................................... 41
5.4 Deficit-value Avoidance .................................................................. 41
5.4.1 Cost Perception ........................................................................... 41
5.4.2 Unfamiliarity ................................................................................. 42
5.5 Marketing Avoidance ....................................................................... 42
5.6 Response of Content ....................................................................... 43
5.6.1 Celebrity Endorser ....................................................................... 43
5.6.2 Music............................................................................................ 44
5.6.3 Direct Marketing ........................................................................... 45
6 Conclusion and Discussion ................................................ 46
6.1 Conclusion ....................................................................................... 46
6.2 Discussion........................................................................................ 48
6.2.1 Contribution .................................................................................. 48
6.2.2 Limitations of the research ........................................................... 49
6.2.3 Future research ............................................................................ 49
7 References ............................................................................ 51
Appendices................................................................................ 56
Appendix 1 – Interview Guidelines ......................................................... 56
Appendix 2 – Logos used for Interviews ............................................... 59
Appendix 3 – Transcript Translation ...................................................... 60
Appendix 4 – Interview Audiofiles .......................................................... 72
List of Figures
Figure 2.1 The Expanded Framework - Five types of Brand Avoidance .......... 8
Figure 3.1 The Data Analysis Process ............................................................. 20
Figure 4.1 Main Categories of Service Brand Avoidance ............................... 23
Figure 5.1 Service Brand Avoidance Framework ............................................ 34
Figure 6.1 Adapted Framework for Drivers of Service Brand Avoidance ...... 48
List of Tables
Table 1 List of Interviews ........................................................................ 19
iv
1 Introduction
The following chapter will provide the reader with background information to get a
deeper knowledge of the phenomena branding in order to understand the research
theme of this thesis. The problem leading to the purpose of the paper will be
presented, as well as three more specific research questions. Lastly, the chapter
contains delimitations of the research to ease understanding of the subject as a
whole.
1.1 Background
Branding has established more attention in both literature and marketing,
and is a significant asset for the company. Since brands and consumption
appear nearly every day in the modern society, there are major characteristics
of our lives (Kapferer, 2012). A brand in this perspective can be stated as “a
name, term, design, symbol, or any other feature that identifies one seller’s
good or service as distinct from those of other seller” (American Marketing
Association, 2013a).
Brands have the power to provide firms with sole associations and give them a
special meaning for the consumers. They often provide a competitive
advantage, which makes it more difficult for the competitors to enter the same
market (Keller, 2008), and are consequently critical to the success of the
company (Wood, 2000). The market today values most successful
corporations at far more than the value of their tangible assets. The major
companies’ intangible objects, including brand equity, increased in market
value from less than 20% in 1975 to 80% in 2005 (Clifton, 2009).
Consumers often purchase brands for the several positive benefits they
represent. Many studies confirm the idea that consumers express themselves,
and create their identities and self-concepts through the brands they purchase
(Lee, Motion & Conroy, 2009a). Most large brands are created on a
foundation of trust resulting from customers’ experience of purchasing and
consuming products and services sold under the brand name. For several
brands, such as Coca-Cola and Marlboro, consumers find it hard to separate
other similar competing brands in blind tests. In these situations, brand
communications have a more essential role together with great products or
services, and exceptional distribution (Clifton, 2009).
Moreover, strong service brands have existed for years, and the extensiveness
of service branding and its complexity have accelerated in the past decade. It
has been stated that some of the greatest branding successes in the last 30
years have come in the area of services (Keller, 2008).
1.2 Problem Discussion
Traditional consumer research generally stresses the idea of positive
consumption of brands (Lee et al., 2009a), and also the development on
favourable consumer-brand relationship to support positive consumer
behaviour (He, Li & Harris, 2012; Lopez & Sicilia, 2013; Quinton, 2013).
1
However, issues such as brand avoidance and brand hate have received more
attention, as the importance of knowing what consumers do not want has
been identified (Lee et al., 2009a; Liao, Chou & Lin, 2015). Various
explanations for avoiding certain brands may exist, but these have not been
researched to a wider extent. The specific topic brand avoidance has become
more interesting and significant to scholars, managers, and consumers (Lee,
Conroy & Motion, 2009b). When only studying successful companies, one
may never recognize the causes of unsuccessful businesses. Consequently,
studying consumption phenomenon excluding its antithesis, will most likely
limit the process of gaining knowledge about consumers (Lee, Fernandez &
Hyman, 2009c).
When looking narrowly at the existing literature, it becomes clear that most
findings observing anti-consumption emphasis the dissatisfaction with
products and services (Lee et al., 2009b). This exemplifies a gap in the
consumer behaviour studies regarding brand avoidance. It is important,
specifically for marketers, to understand why consumers have negative
attitudes, emotions, and relationships towards specific brands, and therefore
consciously start to avoid them (Knittel, Beurer & Berndt, 2016). Of all
threats, consumer avoidance is most likely to harm brand relationship quality
(McColl-Kennedy, Patterson, Smith & Brady, 2009).
Moreover, there is less research into services branding but it is vitally
important for brand success of both its image and its identity. Services
branding has mostly relied upon the assumption of having the same ideas as
traditional product brand management (De Chernatony, Drury & Segal‐
Horn, 2004), and efforts in defining and measuring quality have come largely
from the goods sector. However, knowledge about goods quality is insufficient
to understand service quality (Parasuraman, Zeithaml & Berry, 1985), which
Crosby (1979) defines as “conformance to requirements”. Services can be seen
as less tangible than products, hence more likely to vary in quality, depending
on the person providing them. Therefore, branding can be particularly
essential for service brands in order to manage intangibility and inconsistency
issues (Keller, 2008).
Furthermore, it can be concluded that the spreading of negative information
about firms and brands can have serious consequences (Bailey, 2004). Since
the quality of the consumer-brand relationship contributes greatly to the
financial outcome (Liao et al., 2015), and as a brand is considered a marketbased asset when it adds value to the company by helping to enhance and
sustain the cash flow for the company, it is of great interest for marketers
(Srivastava, Shervani and Fahey 1998). It is therefore relevant to investigate in
the drivers of service brand avoidance in order to get a more complete image
of the market. This will help to prevent the causes of service brand avoidance,
at least to a greater extent, and to gain improved knowledge of the market
behaviour.
2
1.3 Purpose and Research Questions
The purpose of this thesis is to investigate the drivers of why people
deliberately avoid certain service brands. Based upon the purpose, two main
research questions and one sub-question have been formulated.
1. What are the drivers of brand avoidance in the service industry?
2. How can the drivers identified connect to previous research, primarily
made by Lee et al. (2009b) and later revised by Knittel et al. (2016)?
3. Is it possible to draw conclusions regarding all services?
1.4 Delimitation
This research will not be precisely connected to any specific service category
or market since the field of study is not yet greatly explored, hence it is
considered to be more representative to investigate a less narrowed field. As a
result of previous studies regarding the product field within brand avoidance,
the authors believe the study of the complete service industry exclusively to be
a suitable supplement to earlier findings of both products and services.
However, the research will delimit itself in terms of country and age. Firstly,
the studies will be examined in Sweden solely with participants speaking
Swedish as their native language. This will ease the communication with the
respondents and minimize any possible errors due to language barriers. The
delimitation of country will also help the researchers to access interviewees
from personal networks located in Sweden, and thus be time saving as the
study comprises limits in time. Secondly, the authors will include participants
only above the age of 20, mainly because people below that age are considered
to not have the experiences required, neither do they in most occurrences
have an economy relevant for the study.
3
2 Theoretical Framework
This chapter presents a theoretical framework in order to understand the subject of
the paper; service brand avoidance. The characteristics of services and how those
can be distinguished are presented. Furthermore, previous literature in avoiding
consumption such as anti-consumption and boycotting are defined and followed by
a thorough explanation of the drivers of brand avoidance identified in earlier
studies.
2.1 Services
According to Wilson, Zeithaml, Bitner and Gremler (2012, p. 5) a service can
be defined as: “all economic activities whose output is not a physical product
or construction, is generally consumed at the time it is produced, and
provides added value in forms (such as convenience, amusement, timeliness,
or health) that are essentially intangible concerns of its first purchaser”.
Services are characterized by four factors recognized in the definition:
intangibility, heterogeneity, inseparability and perishability. Each factor
represents distinctive features of a service. A service cannot be seen, felt,
tasted or touched in the same way as a product (Wilson et al., 2012). Those
traits distinguish the intangibility of a service since it is often a performance
or an action. The complexity of a service, in sense of the not similar outcomes
that might occur, is called heterogeneity. Services may differ from case to case,
depending on both the customer and the supplier of the service, which
contributes to the heterogeneity of services. Furthermore, services are
inseparable from the supplier, and in most cases the service is sold first and
produced later. The production often involves customer presence, which
affects the service experience. Another force that affects the experience is
other customers that may be present during the production of a service. A
service is perishable meaning that it cannot be stored, saved, returned or
resold (Wilson et al., 2012). These four well-documented characteristics of
services – intangibility, heterogeneity, inseparability and perishability – must
be acknowledged for a full understanding of service quality (Parasuraman et
al., 1985).
A general method used to recognize values for a new brand in the goods
industry is to research consumers’ needs, thenceforth develop a
manufacturing process and a communication approach that are fundamental
to the brand’s principles (De Chernatony et al., 2004). In the services segment
personnel have a larger effect on creating the brand’s values, hence they need
to be more observant regarding the determination of brand values (De
Chernatony et al., 2004).
2.2 Critical Issues of Services
Companies today believe that more efficient competition comes from
improved customer satisfaction (Wilson et al., 2012). The customer
satisfaction derives from perception of the service quality delivered and how
4
satisfactory the experience is (Wilson et al., 2012). Today’s situation indicates
that many companies offer services that meet basic expectations of customers.
Moreover, the services also fulfil the functional requirements demanded by
the customers. Therefore companies may draw on the opportunity to develop
strategies that enables superior service quality delivered (Sandström,
Edvardsson, Kristensson, & Magnusson, 2008). Service quality and
satisfaction are two similar expressions, but they are not to be mistaken for
being the same. The two expressions originate and result in different aspects
(Sandström et al., 2008). According to Sandström et al. (2008) satisfaction
can be seen as a result of service quality, where service quality is a product of
five dimensions of service: responsiveness, empathy, assurance, tangibles, and
reliability. Responsiveness is the ability of providing quick and high quality
service to the customers, at the same time empathy is important since it is the
relationship between the personnel and customer. Assurance regards the
expertise provided by the personnel to increase the credibility. Moreover,
tangibles are all the physical evidence that can be found when delivering a
service. Lastly, the confidence that the service will be delivered persistently
and accurately on time depends on the reliability. All of these five strategies
create service quality and are crucial to a service’s success (Wilson et al.,
2012).
There are several measurements to service quality (Calabrese, 2012), but the
dominating tool and a paradigm in the field, is SERVQUAL (Parasuraman,
Zeithaml & Berry, 1988a; Parasuraman, Zeithaml & Berry, 1988b; Calabrese,
2012). SERVQUAL is based on the idea of gaps between customer expectation
and customer perception of service quality (Calabrese, 2012).
Expectations have a vast role in services since that is the reference point for
customers when evaluating the service from the actual performance.
Consumers have a zone of tolerance, which is the gap between desired service
that is what the consumers wish for and adequate service that is the least
acceptable service. However, if a service not delivers the expected service it
becomes a service failure and may lead to customers dissatisfaction and exit
from the company (Wilson et al., 2012).
Servicescape is a part of the physical evidence when delivering a service, and
mostly all tangible objects related to the facility where the service is carried
out are included in the servicescape. Both the exterior and the interior
measures of the facility such as parking, landscape, exterior and interior
design, layout, lightning, and scents, comprises the servicescape. The
customer's service experience is influenced by the tangibles available to the
extent that memories and feelings are often connected to tangibles in order to
actually evaluate a service, hence the servicescape plays a critical role for
satisfaction (Wilson et al., 2012).
According to Bitner (1992) and Wilson et al. (2012) the servicescape where the
service is produced is highly visible to customers and can therefore impact
customers’ experience of the service. Bitner (1992) also states that the
perception of the servicescape together with the emotions connected to the
servicescape can lead to positive or negative emotions towards the
organization or brand. Consequently, the negative emotions considered
5
internal responses may lead to avoidance of the company or brand (Bitner,
1992).
2.3 Avoiding Consumption
It is significant for marketers to understand both of the different reasons for
avoiding consumption, as each cause requires special managerial actions
(Banister & Hogg, 2004). Consumers often purchase brands in order for them
to give positive benefits, and to build their identities through the products and
services they use (Lee et al., 2009a). As stated, less investigation emphases on
the reverse concept when consumers reject brands. However, understanding
why consumers avoid products and services, and knowing what consumers do
not want, is highly valuable and important for managers (Banister & Hogg,
2004; Lee et al., 2009a). Researchers suggest that the brands consumers
intentionally avoid are an important aspect of both individual and group
identity, as well as distastes could say a lot about consumers personality
(Hogg & Banister, 2001).
This theoretical framework will include different aspects of avoiding
consumption as well as the brand avoidance framework will be explained in
depth. Avoiding consumption does not explore occurrences where consumers
do not purchase brands because they are too expensive, unavailable, or
inaccessible, as such behaviour is intuitive and therefore does not improve
understanding in the research of brand avoidance (Lee et al., 2009a).
2.3.1 Anti-Consumption
The incentives for anti-consumption can vary among personal, political, and
environmental concerns. It does not only expose a general reduction in
consumers’ behaviour, but also confirm that anti-consumption can be aimed
towards specific products, services, and brands (Iyer & Muncy, 2009).
According to Zavestoki (2002) anti-consumption, refers to “a resistance to,
distaste of, or even resentment or rejection of consumption”. Hogg, Banister
and Stephenson (2009) further state that rejection is at the heart of anticonsumption. It can be seen in different forms, and have varying levels of
visibility. Current branding research has investigated positive consumer brand
relationships such as brand love and affection or emotional attachment, which
consumers commonly have with frequently used brands, expressing the idea
of customer loyalty (Knittel et al., 2016). But as mentioned, this investigation
will focus on the reverse notion of consumer behaviour, avoiding brands.
Active behaviours can form one of the ideas, resistance (e.g. boycotting,
ethical consumption, voluntary simplicity). Rejection, on the other hand,
illustrates a more passive behaviour. Rejection covers services or products not
purchased nor accessed, and brands not chosen, and thus much more
challenging to identify and respond to (Hogg et al., 2009).
2.3.2 The Undesired Self
Hogg and Banister (2001) argue that it is of central significance in consumer
behaviour research to recognize how individuals define themselves through
their consumption experiences. Notions of disgust and rejection in
6
consumption can be associated with the “undesired self” and “undesired end
state”, which is important to understand since they potentially translate into
the rejection of products and services (Hogg & Banister, 2001). Lee et al.
(2009a) discuss these concepts further by stating that consumers protect their
identity by avoiding brands that represent their undesired self, meaning that
they avoid brands that are related to negative reference groups, inauthenticity,
or a loss of individuality. The undesired self is the most relevant physiological
construct for brand avoiding consumption (Lee et al., 2009a).
The choice of consumers’ acceptance or rejection of brands, are often based on
their symbolic attributes. The negative features of consumption decisions
carry important symbolic meaning for consumers when creating their
personal, social, and cultural characteristics (Lee et al., 2009a). Earlier studies
also suggest that consumers avoid certain brands that could possibly add
undesired meaning for them, or brands they consider to be dissimilar to their
existing self-concept (Lee et al., 2009a).
2.3.3 Boycott
Organizational disidentification can occur when consumers distance
themselves from brands and boycott the products or services of companies
that they believe are unrelated to their own values and beliefs (Lee et al.,
2009a). The concept of boycotting seems to be synonymous with brand
avoidance even though dissimilarities can be found (Friedman, 1985).
Friedman (1985) states that boycotting appears when consumers refrain from
purchasing products or services when some form of ideological discontent
with a company or country arises. Hirschman (1970) further argues that
boycotting builds upon the idea that the boycotter will re-enter the
relationship once certain complaints, for instance, change of policy by the
company are adjusted. The most recognizable difference between brand
avoidance and boycotting is that boycotting is often triggered by attitudes of
how a company or a brand is dealing with political opinions (Friedman, 1985).
2.4 Brand Avoidance
Brand avoidance is applicable when consumers avoid a brand despite the fact
that the brand is accessible and the consumers have the financial resources to
purchase the brand. However, brand avoidance is a multifarious phenomenon
and there are several explanations for avoiding brands. More specifically,
brand avoidance focuses on the deliberate rejection of brands (Lee et al.,
2009a). Compared to similar concepts previously explained, the investigation
of brand avoidance aims to recognize why consumers put brands into their
inept sets and choose to avoid a purchase even though they are financially
capable to access the brand (Lee et al., 2009a; Hogg & Banister, 2001). In
contrast to boycotting, there is no guarantee that the consumer will re-enter
the relationship with the brand in the future when brand avoidance occur (Lee
et al., 2009a).
Previous investigators offer the idea that brand avoidance is the anti-thesis of
brand loyalty, and the term brand avoidance is used almost as a synonym to
brand switching (Olivia, Oliver & MacMillan, 1992). Lately, this phenomenon
7
has been further explored by Lee et al. (2009b), and according to Lee et al.
(2009a), earlier categorization of avoiding consumption has been too onedimensional and the focus has been aimed at only one aspect such as
politically motivated brand rejection (Sandıkçı & Ekici, 2009).
Moreover, Lee et al. (2009b) argue that brand avoidance can occur when
brand promises have been undelivered, broken, or when they appear to be
socially damaging or lacking functionally. Lee et al. (2009b) further discuss
other outcomes of brand avoidance that arise when a consumer’s values
regarding a brand are changing and become incongruent with their own
values. This may not only result in avoidance of a specific brand but also could
the promise of a competitor be more appealing, and consequently lead to a
purchase of a competitor on the market to satisfy the needs of the consumer
(Lee et al., 2009b).
2.5 Brand Avoidance Framework
Lee et al. (2009a) added new relevant and important information to the field
of brand avoidance by exploring that there are different reasons behind the
phenomena depending on the consumer. Lee et al. (2009b) then established a
revised framework for brand avoidance containing four different categories:
experiential avoidance, deficit-value avoidance, identity avoidance, and moral
avoidance. The model by Lee et al. (2009b) was later revised by Knittel et al.
(2016) with a fifth category to complement previous studies: advertising. In
order to develop existing literature, the following model will be used in the
thesis for further research.
Experience
Avoidance
Poor
Performance
Identity
Avoidance
Negative
Reference Group
Hassle/
Inconvenience
Inauthenticity
Store
Environment
Deindividuation
Moral
Avoidance
Deficit-Value
Avoidance
Advertising
Anti-Hegemony
Unfamiliarity
Content
Country Effects
Aesthetic
Insufficiency
Celebrity
Endorser
Food Favoritism
Music
Response
Figure 2.1 The Expanded Framework - Five types of Brand Avoidance
Source: Knittel et al., 2016, p. 11
2.5.1 Experiential Avoidance
The main reason to avoid both products and services in the category of
experiential avoidance is negative first hand experiences, typically involving
8
unmet expectations (Lee et al., 2009a). The value of a brand is partially based
on the consumer’s expectations about the actual happening that will occur
when the product or service is purchased (Dall’Olmo Riley & De Chernatony,
2000). Basically, negative experiences of brands lead to dissatisfaction and
later avoidance of brands that fail to meet expectations of customers (Kelley,
Hoffman & Davis, 1993; Lee et al., 2009a). Lee et al. (2009b) discovered
additional findings suggesting that it is the customer’s construction of the
brand as an undelivered brand promise, which subsequently motivate the
participant to avoid a specific brand (Lee et al., 2009b). A promise is a motive
to expect something from a product or service that will or will not occur, so
consequently a brand promise leads to expectations (Grönroos, 2006).
Promises can be based on real or imaginary resources, and can therefore be
either unspoken or obvious (Lee et al., 2009b).
A negative disconfirmation between the customer’s expectations and the
actual delivery of the brand, influences all occurrences of experiential
avoidance, and can be implemented in both service and product brands (Lee
et al., 2009a). There are three different reasons associated with this type of
brand avoidance: poor performance, inconvenience of repairing failed
purchase, and unpleasant store environment (Lee et al., 2009a).
The customers does not always have a memory of the actual product brand,
but only recollect the retailer where the brand can be purchased. The retail
brand obtains negative associations and is blamed for poor performance (Lee
et al., 2009a). Since a brand is a developing value constellation (De
Chernatony & Dall’Olmo Riley, 1998), the product brand and the retail brand
become linked. The negative association of the retail brand, caused by product
or service failure, may therefore generate in an assumption that poorer retail
brands tend to stock poorer product brands (Lee et al., 2009a).
A failed product disconfirms the customer’s expectations, and adds redundant
complications. Hence, the brand is not only rebuilt to represent an unmet
expectation, but also increases inconvenience for the participant. Keaveney
(1995) identified following critical events in service encounters leading to
customer-switching behaviour: inconvenience, pricing, core service failures,
service encounter failures, employee responses to service failures, ethical
problems and attraction by competitors. The same reasons can also be
identified as drivers for brand avoidance (Lee et al., 2009a).
The last cause of experiential avoidance can be initiated by unpleasant brand
experiences within the brand’s store environment, referring to noninterpersonal factors of the shopping experiences, such as stimuli, ambience,
and social factors (Lee et al., 2009b; Arnold, Reynolds, Ponder & Lueg, 2005).
For instance, a dirty and noisy environment at a restaurant or grocery store,
which could possibly result in avoidance of the brand.
2.5.2 Identity Avoidance
The drivers of identity avoidance can be described as a negative symbolic
meaning that a certain brand represents to a consumer and how those values
are incongruent with his or her self-concept (Lee et al., 2009a). The theories
of undesired self and disidentification are frequent throughout the idea of
9
identity avoidance. Not only do consumers purchase desirable brands, but
also maintain their self-concept by avoiding brands perceived to be
incongruent with the desired or actual self-concept (Hogg & Banister, 2001).
Lee et al. (2009b) further contribute to the literature by stating the concept of
a symbolically unappealing promise as an innovative, and more managerially
important way of understanding the idea of identity avoidance. It is possible
for consumers to interpret certain brand promises as symbolically
unappealing, and therefore have the potential to get them closer to the
undesired self. The disidentification with the brand’s symbolically
unappealing promises will consequently lead to brand avoidance in order for
the consumer to manage his or her self-concept (Lee et al., 2009b).
Disidentification concept indicates that consumers may develop their selfconcept by disidentifying with organizations that are inconsequent with their
own values (Elsbach & Bhattacharya, 2001). The fundamental idea is that
consumers engage in brand avoidance because they want to avoid to be
associated with brands they perceive to have negative brand meaning or
values. For instance, a consumer may choose to disidentify with a product or
service for being to “cheap”, and consequently avoid budget brands to distance
himself or herself from an undesired self of the past. Specifically, consumers
avoid a brand because it represents a negative reference group, a lack of
authenticity, or the loss of individuality (Lee et al., 2009b).
Within undesired self, consumers may also avoid brands that are associated
with a negative reference group, because of the fact that those products or
services are symbolically opposing to the individual’s sense of self (Lee et al.,
2009a). The concept of the undesired self is similar to avoidance of a negative
reference group, although a sensitive distinction between these two theories
exists. The idea of a consumer’s undesired self is generally concrete and
specific, while the perception of negative reference groups may be less precise
and more stereotypical in practice, thus based on generalisations of the
characteristic brand user (Elsbach & Bhattacharya, 2001; Lee et al., 2009a).
Another reason for identity avoidance occurs when a consumer perceives a
type of person that obviously consumes branded equipment as being
inauthentic, an undesirable characteristic that he or she does not want to
integrate with the self-concept. Subsequently, the consumer avoids the
association with the brand because of the inauthentic identity presented by its
stereotypical consumer (Lee et al., 2009a). Some brands can even become too
popular, since over-commercialization, or mass production to meet
mainstream demands of a brand can lead to a loss of authenticity (Holt,
2002).
The final sub-category in identity avoidance is deindividuation, where
consumers avoid mainstream brands in order to abstain from a loss of
individuality and self-identity. The avoidance arises when the consumer, in a
symbolic meaning, does not want to be the same as everyone rather than the
functional quality of the product or service. Instead of adding meaning
through the consumption of brands, the use of some brands may actually
debilitate or damage individuality (Lee et al., 2009a).
10
2.5.3 Moral Avoidance
The drivers of moral avoidance are ideological incompatibility and the critical
view of the role of marketing in society. It is the consumer’s perception of a
brand as a socially detrimental promise that motivates moral avoidance (Lee
et al., 2009b). Contrasting to the other avoidance types that are based on how
brand promises impact the individual’s immediate well-being, moral
avoidance contains a societal focus that extends outside the needs of the
consumer (Lee et al., 2009a). The expression ideology is used to refer to
political and socio-economic beliefs. According to Hodge and Kress (1993),
ideology is “a systematic body of ideas, organized from a particular point of
view”. Lee et al. (2009b) suggest that moral avoidance consists of two core
explanations for brand avoidance: country effects and anti-hegemony.
Issues regarding country effects occur when a consumer feels animosity
towards a specific country, and consequently start to dislike iconic brands of
those countries. For instance, brands such as Coke and McDonald’s are
representative of the countries from which they originate. In other situations,
consumers who are financially patriotic may have reasons to avoid products
and services that they consider redundant for the economic development and
well being of the country (Lee et al., 2009b).
In terms of anti-hegemony, or against domination, the previous findings in
the area of consumer resistance are similar (Holt, 2002). In contrast to other
types of brand avoidances, moral avoidance is based on the perception of the
brand at an ideological level and how it negatively impacts the wider society.
Some consumers avoid leading brands in order to prevent the growth of
monopolies and large businesses that are questioned concerning corporate
irresponsibility. Usually, multi-national firms have a greater visibility and
they are often under higher inspection, hence they are held responsible for
their actions (Lee et al., 2009b). These findings are similar to previous
research on consumer resistance, where larger firms have a higher risk of
being targets of consumer criticism (Holt, 2002). Consumers may also have a
reason to avoid brands when they perceive products or services as being
impersonal. Furthermore, they dislike the way large brands dehumanize the
representatives of the brand, and rather prefer to foster a local business
relationship (Lee et al., 2009b).
The final characteristic of moral avoidance is when consumers believe that the
avoidance of a brand is their moral duty, if the brand is perceived to be
oppressive and overly dominant. This ethical viewpoint is another
distinguishing feature of moral avoidance, not visible in the other categories of
brand avoidance (Lee et al., 2009b).
2.5.4 Deficit-value Avoidance
Lee et al. (2009b) developed the first model of Lee et al. (2009a) with a fourth
category: deficit-value avoidance, and it is covered by three sub-themes:
unfamiliarity, aesthetic insufficiency, and food favouritism. This type of
avoidance occurs when consumers perceive a brand representing an
unacceptable cost to benefit trade-off. From an ethical perspective, the
fundamental issue regarding deficit-value avoidance is the rejection of a brand
11
because of the unacceptable trade-off that it characterizes to the consumer
(Lee et al., 2009b). The sub-themes in deficit-value avoidance are all similar
in the way that they involve an unfavourable perception of the brand’s utility.
Continuing with the negative promises framework, Lee et al. (2009b) believe
that the idea of a functionally inadequate promise is an appropriate
comparison for understanding this type of avoidance (Lee et al., 2009b).
When consumers compare unfamiliar brands with brands they better
recognize, an avoidance of the unfamiliar brand may occur, since they believe
those brands to be lower in quality and higher in risk (Richardson, Jain &
Dick, 1996).
The second sub-theme of deficit-value avoidance is aesthetic insufficiency,
where the consumers use the appearance of a brand as a measurement of the
functional value and therefore avoid certain brands lacking aesthetical
features, such as packaging, specific colours, and utilitarian requirements (Lee
et al., 2009b). Even though the consumer is dubious about the connection
between aesthetic and quality, he or she may still prefer the product ‘to look
good’. From a practical perspective, beauty stimulates confidence, while
aesthetic inadequacy does the opposite (Lee et al., 2009b).
The last sub-category is food favouritism, which contains consumers avoiding
food associated with certain value-deficit brands, but can still purchase other
products with the same brand name (Lee et al., 2009b). When it comes to
decisions concerning food alternatives, consumers are more likely to be ‘better
safe than sorry’ and consequently avoid unfamiliar, contaminated, or harmful
brands (Green, Draper & Dowler, 2003). The brand promise of lower quality
for a better price is sufficient for specific products and services, but not for
food (Lee et al., 2009b).
2.5.5 Advertising
Knittel et al. (2016) have identified an additional category to the brand
avoidance framework initially made by Lee et al. (2009b), namely advertising
avoidance, as a further reason for brand avoidance. Knittel et al. (2016)
suggest that advertising as a driver for brand avoidance consists of four
specific components: content, celebrity endorser, music, and response.
The content of advertisement is built upon several different components in
advertising such as the story and the message. The fundamental idea conveyed
to the consumers is represented by these factors, and thus they are a
significant part of the advertisement. The content of the advertisement is an
influencer of disliking a specific commercial, which later may lead to a brand
avoidance movement of that brand. Another reason for consumers to avoid a
brand in the context of advertisement could be that the audience sees an
advert as provocative (Knittel et al., 2016). The use of violence is perceived as
distasteful by some consumers and therefore lead to an avoidance of the
brand using that type of advertisement, since strong taboo ideas has a
negative effect on brand attitudes and buying intentions. The fact that an
audience react differently depending on the emotions towards taboo themes, a
12
brand may be careful with using that marketing strategy (Sabri & Obermiller,
2012).
The second sub-theme, celebrity endorser, refers to the fact that the
consumer solely focuses on the endorser of the product or service, rather than
how the advertisement itself is perceived. The consumers regularly identify
themselves with the celebrity, and consequently purchase the brand as an
outcome of the positive symbolic association (Walker, Langmeyer &
Langmeyer, 1992; Apéria & Back, 2004). Celebrities have an image and
subsequently transfer that image to the advertised brand (Apéria & Back,
2004). If a consumer dislikes a celebrity it can lead to a disapproval of the
advertised brand as well, and result in brand avoidance (Knittel et al., 2016).
The advertising avoidance referring to music can be identified as one of the
most commonly used creative tools in advertising to stimulate the audience
and their estimation of an advert (Lantos & Craton, 2013; Shimp & Andrews,
2013). Music affects attitudes and can have an impact on purchasing
behaviour, and consequently also influence an avoiding behaviour (Knittel et
al., 2016).
The last sub-category, response to advertisement, refers to the individual
interpretation of the message, as a part of the communication process, and is
dependent on the receiver (Kotler, Keller, Brady, Goodman & Hansen, 2009).
Meaning that the same advertisement generates different outcomes and
responses, depending on the viewers (Percy & Elliott 2009). This type of
reaction is often vague in terms of details described and level of rationality,
but can be explained as “stupid”, “annoying, or “senseless” advertisement
(Knittel et al., 2016).
13
3 Methodology
In this chapter the research design in terms of mainly exploratory studies will be presented
as well as the abductive and qualitative research used. In order for the reader to easier
understand the collection of data, the method of semi-structured interviews will be outlined
together with the sampling approach. The chapter ends with a review considering
trustworthiness of the research to strengthen the reliability of the paper.
3.1 Research Design
The nature of the research design is closely linked to the purpose of the research, and
can be exploratory, descriptive or explanatory. The decision of the most suitable
approach for the study is connected to the research question (Saunders et al., 2012).
Exploratory studies explore topics of interest to gain understanding and insights.
This way of conducting research is effective if the precise nature of the problem is
uncertain. Exploratory studies come with a wide range of data collecting methods
(Saunders et al., 2012). However, due to the complexity of the topic of interest it is
important to collect data that are exploring enough to be relevant. Interviewing
experts on the subject, in-depth interviews, semi-structured interviews, and focus
groups are all common methods used to exploratory studies, which support that the
study executed for this paper suits the type of interviews selected. Another important
aspect is that the exploratory purpose forces the interviews to be unstructured in
order to access high-quality data contributions (Saunders et al., 2012).
Descriptive studies highlight the importance of acquiring knowledge about the topic
before collecting data. This type of study can be an extension or a part of exploratory
or explanatory studies. The focus lies on describing an accurate picture of events,
persons or situations. It has been criticized for being too descriptive instead of
reaching further to conclusions (Saunders et al., 2012).
Explanatory studies is linked to quantitative methods. The focus lies on the
relationship between variables deriving from a situation or problem. The data
collected can be statistical investigations that through correlation may be connected
to various events of interest (Saunders et al., 2012).
This study is mainly exploratory in its nature, since the primary goal is to investigate
and explore the drivers of service brand avoidance, and is closely connected to the
purpose driving the thesis. However, since the thesis investigate the drivers of service
brand avoidance, the drivers also need to be described in the events of the
consumers, and these descriptions lay the foundation of the empirical material and
later the analysis. Therefore, it is important to highlight the descriptive elements of
the thesis essential for the outcome. Thus, to gain insight of personal acts and the
understanding of why people act as they do in particular situations an exploratory
design with descriptive elements will apply.
14
3.2 Research Approach
3.2.1 Abductive Approach
When research is conducted to explore phenomenon, recognize patterns and detect
themes in order to create new models or modify already existing ones, an abductive is
suitable. Abductive research approach can be considered a combination of the two
approaches deduction and induction, with some elements combined from each
approach. Inductive reasoning is built on the foundation of empirical observations
that leads to the concept. Deductive reasoning is based on the concept or theory,
which decides which data that is relevant for the data collection (Yin, 2011). Thus, the
deduction approach focus on theory and moves towards data, and induction form
data to theory, where an abductive approach fall into an on-going process that goes
back and forth between data and theory (Saunders et al., 2012).
The deductive approach is common in areas of economics, natural science, and
formal social science theories of human behaviour, and is therefore more applicable
on theoretical fields where the phenomena cannot always be observed. The deductive
approach is built upon already existing knowledge and established theories, that
through deductive reasoning leads to new theory building (Woodwell, 2014). In
contrast to the inductive approach, the accuracy of the conclusion using the deductive
approach is based on the premises on which the theory is built. Subsequently, the
deductive approach is rarely criticized in terms of the interpretation of the result.
However, there are fields where the deductive approach is limited and not effective.
To research the world or human behaviour where assumptions are not constant, the
deductive approach will not work and the result can be discussed. Lastly, deductive
reasoning is mostly sensitive when the assumptions are dubious (Woodwell, 2014).
The inductive approach works by using the collected empirical data in order to come
to conclusion (Woodwell, 2014). The empirical data is not founded in any particular
findings of previous knowledge, as an opposite of the deductive approach. The
empirical data collected is later interpreted in order to reach a conclusion and
develop theories or concepts. This reasoning approach is based on the set of limited
observations that is required to retrieve empirical data. One of the issues with using
an inductive approach is the generalisation that can happen by giving only one
explanation (Woodwell, 2014). Consequently, it is important to engage a process that
can eliminate alternative explanations. Another problem that might occur is the fact
that the sample does not represent the general population and will therefore lead to
misguided information, and these issues are always a risk when conducting
qualitative research (Woodwell, 2014).
The most appropriate approach for this thesis is the abductive approach, as it
consists of various elements of both inductive and deductive outlines. However, the
approach in the paper tends to comprise more inductive elements than deductive as
the particular research field is rather unexplored, and there is a lack of theories to
deduct from. Although, Lee et al. (2009b) developed a general model regarding brand
avoidance from which parts of the thesis is based on. The brand avoidance framework
of Lee et al. (2009b) together with the revised model by Knittel et al. (2016) can be
considered the initial steps of the research. Previous literature generalises theories
regarding both products and services, and thus opens up a gap to explore whether
service brand avoidance is similar or depends on other parameters. The aim of this
15
thesis is to connect previous literature, if possible, to service brand avoidance. By
focusing on the data collected to recognize patterns and behaviour, either a new
model or a revised model of Lee et al. (2009b) and Knittel et al. (2016) will be
presented. Hence, the focus continues to return back and forth between theory and
empirical data, in order to develop a model exclusively suitable for service brand
avoidance.
3.2.2 Qualitative Approach
In order to collect data a suitable approach for data collection must be chosen. There
are two main approaches, namely qualitative and quantitative approach, and data
collection can also be completed with a combination of both qualitative and
quantitative approach. Moreover, the different types of research approaches are more
usable in some types of research, therefore it is important to thoroughly reflect upon
which one to use (Woodwell, 2014).
Quantitative research is often associated with large numbers and statistics. This type
of research functions by using a large sample and after analyzing the data collected a
conclusion can be drawn. This approach is suitable for confirming previous
knowledge or identifying trends. It is shown that quantitative research often leads to
understanding of general trends opposed to qualitative research, where detailed
information of a particular cause can be found (Woodwell, 2014).
Qualitative research can be described as a profound circumstantial understanding of
those being studied. The sampling quantity of qualitative research is fewer than
quantitative research because of the complexity in the data collected (Woodwell,
2014). Different areas tend to lean different ways regarding which research method to
use. Natural science leans more on quantified data in order to come to general
conclusion of different patterns. Social science and humanities on the other hand can
work with both quantitative and qualitative, but to get a greater understanding of the
behaviour of a phenomenon, emphasis is put on qualitative studies (Woodwell,
2014).
Since this thesis investigates the drivers that motivate service brand avoidance, a
qualitative research approach is more suitable for the objective. Thus, a qualitative
research approach will provide a more thorough understanding of why consumers
deliberately choose to avoid certain service brands. In order to understand why
people behave as they do, it is essential to conduct interviews providing information
of which parameters that are taken into consideration when deliberately avoiding
service brands. The interviews will also give an insight in why these parameters are
determinants in service brand avoidance.
3.3 Data Collection Method
Data collection can be done in several different ways, given that the approach is to
acquire qualitative data eliminates several of them. A common way to collect
qualitative data is through opinion seeking which includes interviews, focus groups
and open-ended survey research. Through a qualitative perspective, interviews are
most often valuable since they provide the possibility to identify others
characteristics, opinions and perspectives (Woodwell, 2014).
16
Commonly used typologies to separate the different forms of interviews available are
structured, semi-structured, and unstructured interviews. Structured interviews,
mostly used in quantitative data collections, are standardised where the interviewer
asks questions from a questionnaire and record the answers (Saunders et al., 2012).
Both unstructured and semi-structured interviews can be considered nonstandardised, meaning that there is no predetermined questionnaire sheet that
strictly will be followed. Semi-structured interviews are conducted with some
structure where the interviewer has a sheet with a few questions and themes that will
be covered. This technique stimuli discussion and makes the interviewee reflect more
easily about the theme. Unstructured interviews, on the other hand, are conducted
without prepared sheets of questions to rest on. During this informal method, it is
important for the interviewer to focus on the aspect required to be explored since the
interviewee will talk about events, beliefs and behaviour more straightforwardly
(Saunders et al., 2012).
This thesis is qualitative in its nature, thus the use of semi-structured interviews are
suitable. Compared to unstructured interviews the thesis requires some structure
during the interviews since its primary goal is to identify which drivers that motivate
deliberate service brand avoidance. It is therefore necessary to make use of opinion
seeking research to explore and understand why people act as they do.
3.3.1 Semi-structured Interviews
Semi-structured interviews are relevant in the research for this thesis, since it can be
conducted to explore a deeper insight of the interviewee. It provides an opportunity
to engage the interviewee to explain or add information to the topic. This type of
interview invites to a discussion making it possible for the interviewer to not only
explain phenomenon where the interviewee is confused, but also to probe the
interviewee’s answers which can lead to valuable data and insights (Saunders et al.,
2012).
However, the interview is semi-structured in nature due to the preparations of
questions but the order of questions is not important (see appendix 1). During the
interviews, the questions were repeated several times as the interview was built to
inspire and engage the interviewee. Consequently, it was possible for the participant
to recall new stories and present valuable data as the dialogue went on.
3.4 Sampling Selection
When collecting data, some research fields are narrow enough, which opens up the
possibility to collect data from the whole population (Saunders et al., 2012). In the
case of this thesis it was not achievable to collect data from a total population. When
researching service brand avoidance the total population is all service consumers who
make deliberate choices of purchasing or not. Therefore, instead of using the total
population it was suitable to use sampling. A sample is a subset of the total
population that represent the full set in a meaningful way (Saunders et al., 2012;
Becker, 1998). It was also relevant to use sampling for this examination as the
impractical factor to study the full population was a decisive aspect as well as lack of
resources in terms of money and time (Saunders et al., 2012).
17
There are several existing sampling techniques, each suitable for different scenarios.
Different sampling techniques can at the broadest categorization be divided into
probability and non-probability sampling. Probability sampling is most commonly
used when investigating quantitative data with regards of surveys and consists of
several ways of choosing the sample, all resulting in a multi-stage sampling method.
Non-probability sampling is used in order to subjectively be able to select the
samples, which is common in business research (Saunders et al., 2012).
3.4.1 Convenience Sampling
Convenience sampling is the most common form of haphazard sampling, where the
samples are chosen out of convenience for the researcher. This form of sampling
method is criticized in terms of credibility of the research (Saunders et al., 2012).
Saunders et al. (2012) highlights that samples chosen out of convenience often meet
the purposive sampling criteria. Convenience sampling can be used when resources
are scarce, and if the time frame or financial resources are limited, convenience
sampling is a way to still conduct the research (Saunders et al., 2012).
The convenience sampling was a suitable approach in order to accomplish the
purpose of the thesis. The sampling criteria in this study is based on the idea that the
people interviewed are consumers that deliberately commit purchase decisions, thus
it was possible to interview anyone that fulfilled those requirements. By not allocating
a large amount of time on the sampling process, more time was spent on analysing
the data received. However, the credibility aspect may not apply fully on this thesis
because of the low sample requirements, and the largest threat for using this method
is bias issues. Nevertheless, the advantage in terms of money and time that comes
with convenience sampling overweighs the negativities it brings.
3.4.2 Sampling Size
When collecting qualitative data through semi-structured interviews, it is difficult to
determine a proper sampling size. Regarding interviews, there are no particular rules
stating the general sampling sizes. The understanding, insights, and validity gained
from the interviews are more likely to derive from the analysis of the collected data
(Saunders et al., 2012). Nevertheless, when conducting semi-structured interviews
literature recommend continuing collecting qualitative data, which means conducting
supplementary interviews until the data collected reaches saturation. When the
collected data provides only a few or no new insights, information or themes,
saturation occurs. The suggested minimum sample size for semi-structured
interviews is 5 to 25 (Saunders et al., 2012).
Moreover, when the numbers of interviews reached 13 it was agreed that no new
information was collected. It was decided to conduct 3 additional interviews in order
to confirm or disconfirm that saturation was reached. After 16 interviews there were
no new themes, information, or insights at all, making the practical collection process
complete.
18
3.5 Data Collection Process
The collection of data was done through semi-structured interviews, which gained
several valuable insights regarding service brand avoidance. Before the actual
interviews were conducted, the questions were tested, firstly on the authors followed
by two external participants. The testing discovered a couple of minor flaws, which
were solved, and subsequently the real interviews could begin. The questionnaire
with the questions used during all the interviews can be found in appendix 1.
All of the interviews were constructed in the same way, where the interviewee initially
was asked to define a brand and a service in order to create a more comfortable
climate. Secondly, the interviewer shared a formal definition of the two concepts to
generate a complete understanding of the subject. The following step allowed the
interviewee to express what brands within the service sector that was favourable and
why, which generated in an easier transition to the opposite, negative notions of
brands. At this point, the interviewee was handed a paper with 44 different service
brand logos (appendix 2) in order to increase the spectra of services that the
interviewee came up with. Before continuing to the first actual question, the
phenomenon brand avoidance was presented to the interviewee. A list of all
participants can be found in table 1.
The first question was directly aimed at the subject and asked if the interviewee
deliberately avoided any service brand. Here, the interviewee shared at least one or
two stories related to service brand avoidance. However, it was obvious that the
interviewees often had a hard time connecting it to services, since they found the
concept easier applicable on products. Therefore, it was important for the interviewer
to keep to services without making the interviewee uncomfortable, which could affect
the sharing ability of the participant. The second question contained nearly the same
content where the interviewee was supposed to imagine that they had all the money
in the world and that all brands were available in order to open up the mind of the
participant, even though the same premises as on the first question applied.
The following section consisted of five different scenarios where the interviewee and
the interviewer discussed if any of these situations possibly could lead to brand
avoidance. Originally, the scenarios were supposed to act as a “confirm or deny”
section where previous literatures’ findings were discussed. However, the scenarios
functioned as a help to open up the mind, and inspired the interviewee to recall
personal stories, hence those became important for the thesis.
Lastly, the finishing question comprised a discussion where the interviewee was
asked to share what reason that was the most common driver for people to engage in
brand avoidance and a consideration of other causes than those discussed.
Consequently, this led to new findings in terms of confirmation, but also new
perspectives of service brand avoidance.
Table 1 List of Interviews
Interview
A1
Gender
Female
Age Occupation
56 Nurse
Duration (m:s)
21:14
19
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
A8
B1
B2
B3
B4
B5
B6
B7
B8
Male
Female
Male
Male
Male
Male
Male
Male
Female
Female
Male
Male
Male
Male
Male
22
25
24
24
27
24
23
46
52
25
28
22
25
25
24
Industrial worker
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
IT-consultant
Middle-manager
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
Student
23:32
26:31
39:21
38:39
34:24
24:06
30:53
52:26
47:16
22:51
24:40
22:09
33:14
47:55
31:59
3.6 Data Analysis Process
After the data was collected, the recordings were transcribed into quotes related to
brand avoidance. The massive amount of quotes was later reduced and categorized
depending on the cause of brand avoidance. Both authors coded the quotes together
into the different categories to prevent biases or single angle views. When the
collected data was coded, the essential findings were added to chapter 4 and later
chapter 5 where the analysis continued. Connections to previous literature were
recognized, but also patterns of new causes of brand avoidance were identified,
allowing the authors to draw conclusions of the findings.
Data
reduction
Coding of
data
Conclusion
& new
findings
Figure 3.1 The Data Analysis Process
3.7 Trustworthiness
When conducting semi-structured interviews, the validity level is considered high
since the interview opens up the questions and the interviewer may clarify the
questions, which eliminates uncertainty of the interviewee. The interviewer may also
20
discover themes and explore the answers from multiple angles (Saunders et al.,
2012).
Qualitative research reliability is questioned regarding whether other researches
would disclose comparable information. However, since semi-structured interviews
can differ from interview to interview due to the complex findings that are expected,
it is not essential that the interviews can be repeated as they mirror the reality at the
time the data is collected (Saunders et al., 2012). Moreover, since the topic explored
may be considered complex and dynamic, the necessity of using qualitative semistructured interviews may overweight the difficulties of replicate the study. An
attempt to guarantee that the study could be replicated would not be realistic or
possible without clarifying the power of this type of research. Therefore it is
suggested to keep a clear research design where the motives support the decision of
strategy, method, and data collected (Saunders et al., 2012).
The information gathered can also be questioned in matter of reliability due to
several forms of bias. The interviewer can be bias through different actions during the
interview, for instance hand-gestures, voice tone, and comments to the interviewee.
The interviewee may be considered bias if the answers are not truthful or the
interviewee withholds information (Saunders et al., 2012). Semi-structured
interviews have a tendency to be invasive for the interviewee, since the aim is to
understand complexity of a topic and seek explanations, which require information
that can be considered sensitive. In order to avoid different forms of bias it is
important for the interviewer to prepare for the interviews (Saunders et al., 2012).
Since convenience sampling was applied, all the interviewees were known, which
made it possible for the interview to take place in a familiar environment. The
interviewees were also informed that their contribution would be anonymous and
could therefore share sensible information. A further reason to share sensible
information could be the result of the relationship to the interviewer, which made the
interviewee comfortable enough to share inner thoughts. Although, at the same time
as the relationship can open up individuals it can also make individuals bias and not
share the complete story or not even mention various scenarios that could have been
important for the findings. Another negative aspect of using convenience sampling is
that the participants may not qualify for the interviews, however, in this case with
little requirements all participants were fully capable of participating. Finally, it was
considered important that the interviewee was informed that there are no restrictions
or wrong answers, in order to release tension that could appear.
During the interviews the focus on the preparation was in line with the suggestions of
Saunders et al. (2012) for overcoming biases. In order to complete the
recommendations, the authors appeared professional and did not share more
information to some of the interviewees nor any pre-hand information. Furthermore,
the beginning of the interview was rather easy-going where the participant and the
interviewer together reached definitions of the phenomenon that needed to be
defined in order to proceed. The first few interviews gave the insight of people finding
it difficult to recall actual service encounters or experiences, and to solve the issue
some ideas of how to inspire the participants were discussed in order to be prepared
for the rest of the remaining interviews. At last, the interviewers behaviours were
21
always appropriate during the interviews and more formal than usual in order to
overcome the biases that might appear.
At last, the interviews were conducted in Swedish, which required translation for the
thesis. The translation has been implemented by its qualifications in best way
possible in order to convey the same message as the participants conveyed during the
interviews. The translated quotations together with the original Swedish quotation
can be found in appendix 3.
22
4 Empirical Findings
This chapter initially presents general findings from the interviews to provide the
reader with a broad perspective of the results, followed by drivers of brand
avoidance illustrated with a model. The model will be supported with quotations
from the interviews and placed within the categories found.
Experential
Avoidance
Identity
Avoidance
Deficitvalue
Avoidance
Moral
Avoidance
Marketing
Avoidance
Figure 4.1 Main Categories of Service Brand Avoidance
Source: Developed by the authors
4.1 General Findings
The aim of conducting semi-structured interviews was to gain deeper insights
of people's behaviour regarding deliberate avoidance of service brands. The
interviews quickly provided an insight in the broad spectra of different kinds
of avoidance behaviour. However, during the interviews it became evident
that people experienced a hard time to actually identify and describe services
they use more or less frequently. Several interviewees expressed the
difficulties of talking about services compared to products. This can be seen in
a quote from participant B1:
“It is probably easier with products, that one may avoid certain
product brands, services are probably a little more difficult in my
opinion.”
B1 (male, 46)
Another participant highlighted the same issue when discussing the
difficulties of realising service scenarios connected to brand avoidance:
“It is easier on products.”
B7 (male, 25)
Nevertheless, even if it was evident that people struggled in remembering and
recalling services, each participant managed to share several stories connected
to service brand avoidance in different ways.
23
The interviews gained another important insight on the issue of service brand
avoidance. The different experiences and stories shared by the participants
included a wide range of categories and brands, meaning that no general
trends of either service categories or brands were identified, and the
participants provided examples taken from different industries. As seen in
appendix 3, participant A4 shared a story of a public transport company,
Västtrafik, which basically has a monopoly in the Västra Götaland region,
leading to brand avoidance, while participant B7 and A3 spoke about negative
experiences of the mobile operator Halebop and Pizza Hut.
Among other drivers of service brand avoidance, one participant identified
brand loyalty as a reason to avoid other brands. A scenario from A4, in
appendix 3, revealed that the loyalty for the mobile operator Fello generated a
more hostile attitude towards competitors, and consequently created service
brand avoidance.
The findings and outcomes of the interviews generated a deeper knowledge of
the fundamental drivers of service brand avoidance. However, various drivers
could be found among different consumers, and some consumers also had
more than one reason to avoid a brand. One example of a firm associated with
avoidance by many participants was the airline Ryanair. The company was
brought up several times during the interviews but was avoided for different
reasons, as negative occurrences, unethical statements by the CEO, and
deficit-value drivers, for instance, which can be found in appendix 3 in
statements of participant B2, B3 and B4. Where also participant B4 had
experienced more than one driver for service brand avoidance of the same
brand.
4.2 Drivers of Brand Avoidance
After conducting the interviews, all of the answers from the participants were
arranged into five categories: experiential, identity, deficit-value, moral, and
advertising avoidance. The five drivers of service brand avoidance could all be
connected to earlier studies by Lee et al. (2009b) and Knittel et al. (2016), and
consequently be adapted into the model previously made by the authors
mentioned. The following section will provide the readers with statements
from the in-depth interviews in order to divide the answers into each category.
4.2.1 Experiential Avoidance
The type of service brand avoidance regarding self-experienced occasions was
by far the most mentioned category among the participants. The central
drivers for this type of avoidance was due to negative experiences, often
related to unmet expectations since a high expectation easier may lead to
dissatisfaction. The following example of SAS demonstrates that the
anticipation of the brand led to unmet beliefs due to poor performance as the
expectation was not fulfilled:
“When I flew with SAS to China last time, they had some sort of low
price version. The plane was old and bad, and no beverage or
anything was included. Then you had an expectation of what is
24
common practice for long flights and they did not deliver giving the
expectation. It was probably because of the price class, it certainly
says somewhere that it is not included, even if you can add that they
did not live up to the expectation level, neither on service or
entertainment.”
B1 (male, 46)
A brand obviously has to deliver a comprehensive service, however, many
participants were clearly dissatisfied with the overall service performance of a
firm. Participant A4 revealed that the poor performance and the unmet
expectations generated in avoidance:
“If we take Pinchos for example, and when you have talked to other
people where to go out eating, most people suggest Pinchos, but I have
said no […] I think it is a little overestimated and made it look better
than it was, I believe. Maybe it is not anything wrong with the brand
itself, but I have a negative attitude against it. For that reason, I
would rather try, if we are eating tapas, another restaurant that I do
not know of. They have a lack of service, and not the service that you
expect from a restaurant. Mostly because they are using this app.”
A4 (male, 24)
Issues regarding core service failure were apparent in more than one
interview. It obviously indicated that when a brand cannot deliver a complete
service, especially the essential business that the customer should be able to
expect, the brand avoidance behaviour is evident, showed by participant A6:
“I avoid 3 because I had service on my cell phone on, what it felt like,
two places in Sweden. I could walk in the middle of Gothenburg
without being able to talk […] 3 will never have better service than
Telia or Telenor whatever they do. Not even if I will get a phone for
free and have to pay 100 SEK a month, I will not take them. I really do
not like them.”
A6 (male, 27)
Another visible driver of avoidance arose when the environment was not
satisfying. Due to unmet expectations, participant B2 consequently avoided
the travel organizer SEMBO:
“SEMBO, I avoid them. It was when we rented an apartment in Italy
and when we arrived it was horrible. It was nothing like the picture
we had seen but just really, really bad. When we arrived, instead of
cuddling and sunbathing, we had to search for new accommodation,
which we could not find since the whole town was out of housing.
When we got back, we got maybe 500 SEK. After that we avoid
SEMBO.”
B2 (female, 52)
25
Another participant avoided the hotel chain Scandic because of an unhygienic
atmosphere:
“We have stayed at that chain several times before, but this place was
not good… For instance, the chairs in the restaurant were not fresh, it
was dirty, it did not feel fresh. The cleaning did not work in public
area.”
A1 (female, 56)
Furthermore, as seen in appendix 3, participant A2 further argued that the
health centre Nordic Wellness’s location did not meet the requests or
expectations of an adequate service environment. Additionally, one of the
reasons A5 avoided the bus company Swebus was due to the fact that the
environment was lacking in comfort alternatives, which can also be found in
appendix 3.
Regarding self-experienced occurrences with brands, the different avoidance
drivers from the participant did not only concern the environment or the
overall performance of the business, but the participants did also comment on
issues regarding inconvenience and unreliability. B6 experienced the use of
Apple’s applications as hassled and therefore avoided the brand:
“A part of the reason why I avoid Apple is their services. It is very
closed and controlled, all of their services are very odd in my opinion.
It is a lot about that if you choose their product, you have to choose
their services. That connection is not attractive to me at all. I want to
use which programme and which service I want.”
B6 (male, 25)
Participant B8 did also find the hassle of using a service as a reason to engage
in service brand avoidance. The insurance company Dina försäkringar, found
in appendix 3, did not please the consumer’s expectations.
Lastly, according to A3, a company must be reliable in order for the customer
to be loyal. The participant consequently avoided SJ to a greater extent
because of untrustworthiness as a driver:
“I avoid SJ as much as I can, and it is just because of the fact that they
are not punctual or reliable.”
A3 (female, 25)
4.2.2 Identity Avoidance
The findings showed that identity avoidance was built on the basis of
meanings and symbolism. Consumers do not want to engage in brands where
negative meanings, symbolism, images or values become factors. Whether the
26
different components are considered negative is a perceived picture of the
consumers that is created with assistance from the brand.
Participant A5 shared an example of Barbershop, a hairdresser salon where
A5 could not identify with the other customers, which led to avoidance:
“For instance Barbershop, it is very masculine, there is much beard.
But it looks very nice and it is not very expensive either and I was
absolutely eager to cut my hair. My first feeling was ‘I do not want to
go in there and cut my hair, I do not feel that I fit in there or this do
not seem like my type of people’. It is outside the comfort zone, I do not
know why but I only felt uncomfortable.”
A5 (male, 24)
Participant A3 shared another example where the customers served as a
negative reference group as well as the brand image that was built upon
advertising and the perception of their goods, which led to an avoidance of
KappAhl:
“Like KappAhl, I would never enter that store. It can probably be that
one does not identify oneself with their customers. It is not like you go
in there and think that they might have something nice, I do not even
go in there. But I have never shopped there, and it is not like I have
heard something bad about them, it is just that I do not identify myself
with their image. That is probably built up from their commercials
and perhaps storefronts and when you see what kind of goods and
models they have. I am probably their target group but it does not
attract me.”
A3 (female, 25)
Brand image or brand identity is closely linked to what consumers think of the
company due to the picture that is co-created with the company. Likewise the
avoidance of KappAhl, as seen in appendix 3, participant B7 showed how
Schenker has failed in establishing themselves as a brand for private
customers which led to service brand avoidance.
Another example of how a brand image can contribute to the avoidance of
brands was from participant A7, who spoke about Ryanair and felt that their
image on the market was bad:
“[…] It is probably identity as well. Also their image, they do not have
a good image on the market […].”
A7 (male, 24)
Furthermore, participant A4 spoke about the mobile operator 3, and how the
perception of that brand was low due to negative stories from friends, which
consequently led to a negative brand identity:
27
“I would avoid 3 as well, and it is not something I have experienced
myself, but it is perhaps the picture one has received from others who
say that 3 is lousy. It feels a little sneaky, little like a scam. Then it also
becomes like if one has been promised something and calls support,
one gets an estimated excuse about why they should not take
responsibility, it is the picture one has. They do not stand for their
mistakes or take their responsibility. When I see the 3 logo I think that
it does not matter what they offer, I would never trust them anyway.
Their brand represents something that does not attract me. It is
probably that the brand is not associated with quality. I do not
identify myself with what the brand represent.”
A4 (male, 24)
Lastly, it was identified that the loss of individuality was a reason to avoid the
brand Snapchat, in order for the consumer to not be the same as everyone:
“I felt that the service, even if everyone uses it and I have heard about
ten people say ‘did you see this on Snapchat?’ and ‘I send it to you on
Snapchat’, I do not have a motivation to use it anyway, it feels more
fun to experience things together instead [...] You do not live your own
life but look for what others do all the time.”
B8 (male, 24)
4.2.3 Moral Avoidance
Moral factors seemed to have a great influence when drivers of avoidance
were recognizable. The participants’ from the interviews did not only consider
the need from a consumer perspective or the service’s functionality, but also
reflected upon corporate social responsibilities and the firm’s role in the
society. These findings revealed that the consumers deliberately avoided
companies that had been accused for child labour, unethical working
conditions, or too strong political opinions, for instance. Participant B7
avoided two private schools because of the unethical viewpoint when grading
students, found in appendix 3.
It was further indicated that unethical scandals might cause a loss of faith in
the company. Participant A4 avoided Telia Sonera because of immoral actions
and prejudice towards the firm:
“When looking at Telia Sonera, one did not trust them after the
scandals in Azerbaijan and Gibraltar […] It is those unethical things
and it feels like they get more unreliable because of that. If a company
did something like that, you do not know what they can lie about. If
they can lie about frauds worth millions and billions, what else can
they lie about…”
A4 (male, 24)
28
Another driver of avoidance was visible depending on the loyalty towards the
brand:
“It matter if I am an existing customer or not. If I am a customer at
H&M for instance, and it is revealed that they are using child labour,
then I may continue shopping there because I am happy with H&M.
But if I have never been shopping there before and hear that they are
using child labour, then I might not have been testing H&M.”
A3 (female, 25)
Not only was brand avoidance affected by unethical activities, but also the
avoidance of supporting hegemony. Accordingly, found in appendix 3,
participant B6 stated that the avoidance of the music service Tidal was
obvious due to multimillionaires earning “more money” seen as unnecessary.
Another reason for avoidance exposed in the interviews was from a cultural
aspect and how different cultures reflect an image of what is acceptable or not.
The following participants had the perception of being ethically wrong if using
a service in their country of origin, but not necessarily in other countries:
“If a cleaning service uses child labour I would not hire that company,
in that case it is something that is going on with child labour here in
Sweden.”
B5 (male, 22)
B6 also believed that one should not use a cleaning service when living in
Sweden:
“It will be a first world issue. If you live in a country where people do
not have money from the start, it will be like ‘okay I deserve this’,
while in Sweden it is more ‘wow, should I really do something like
this’.”
B6 (male, 25)
As mentioned, a company with a highly visible political standpoint may
generate in avoidance of the brand, if the consumer consider the brand to be
outside that area. A2 consequently avoided the union due to their political
stance of policy:
“I do not support the union, they are too politically oriented when they
should not be that at all.”
A2 (male, 22)
4.2.4 Deficit-value Avoidance
When conducting the interviews the participants frequently had an issue with
the price and quality relationship. It was mainly caused by the reason that the
29
consumer perceived a low price brand to be inadequate in quality. They also
had a difficulty with too low prices that were incongruent with their
expectations, and consequently argued that a higher price created more value
for the consumer. Conversely, some of the participants felt that a higher price
sometimes generated in an unacceptable trade-off, and therefore avoided
premium brands.
The cost perception of a brand obviously differed depending on the consumer.
However, several participants had a cautious approach toward hairdressers
regarding price-quality ratio. A5 believed that a lower price at the hairdresser
signifies a lower quality:
“I try to cut my hair as cheap as possible, but there is a bottom limit
just as there is an upper limit […] I have seen so many bad examples.
That is one of the most obvious things one would avoid.”
A5 (male, 24)
The interviewee A7 also indicated that the low price would make the brand
decrease in trustworthiness:
“If there is a hairdresser that only costs 100 SEK, then I feel that there
is something wrong. Maybe it will take 15 minutes less and they use a
shaver half of the time. Then I rather pay a little bit extra.”
A7 (male, 24)
As A7 mentioned, the importance of a higher quality sometimes motivates the
consumer to pay a higher price. Some consumers are more cautious to brands
concerning the quality. B7 stated that a low price of the mobile operators
Hallon and Halebop indicated a lower perception towards the brands, but that
the quality itself is probably adequate:
“Even though the low price mobile operators are available, and those
are included in the calculations when buying a new phone, I never
choose them. For instance, Hallon and Halebop. I actively avoid them
even though they probably would have been just as good but for a
better price.”
B7 (male, 25)
Conversely, some participants felt that a higher price does not always indicate
a better quality, hence they avoided premium brands because of the
inadequate value given. Participant A4 consciously avoided Hilton hotel due
to several factors, one of the reasons were as follows:
“It is probably more nice than Elite Hotel, but let us say that it is twice
as expensive. I do not think it is twice as good in quality and
experience.”
A4 (male, 24)
30
Lastly, when unfamiliarity arose for some consumers, it led to brand
avoidance since they believed that the competitors offered a higher value for
them due to experiences from other brands:
“I am trying to avoid Coop, I believe that they have higher prices than
ICA, their competitor. I have also worked at ICA, so I try to avoid
Coop as much as I can. I avoid Coop and Willys because I am more
familiar with ICA.”
B5 (male, 22)
4.2.5 Marketing Avoidance
During the interviews, consumers discovered reasons in different marketing
techniques leading to brand avoidance. Different components of marketing
approaches were brought up as drivers for avoiding a brand. For instance,
participant B3 described how the content of an online retailer of shoes
commercial was too annoying which led to brand avoidance:
“I have avoided Zalando.se for a very long time because of their
annoying commercial, I hate it, it is so lame, they scream, I cannot
handle it. […] It is the execution of the commercial, it feels awkward,
screaming. When those on the commercial shoots out stuff from the
wells, there is a girl, very stereotypical that it is a girl who sits and
shops shoes and a lot of shoes are coming out of the wells.”
B3 (female 25)
As seen in appendix 3, participant B8 further proved a similar response to
Flygresor.se’s commercial, stating that the advertisement was annoying and
consequently avoided the brand. Participant A4 talked about the same
commercial but focused on the music as the factor leading to brand avoidance
instead:
“If we talk about flight services, I will never use Flygresor.se in my
life. It is only for the music. One gets annoyed at oneself, it is catchy, it
gets stuck. It might be that the music is really good. It is how the
company has presented themselves which has resulted in me saying
actively no.”
A4 (male, 24)
Commercials are important as well as how the receiver conveys the context of
it. Brands often use celebrity endorsement to convey the message, however,
this might result in brand avoidance due to the desire to circumstance a
specific endorser. Participant A5 described Justin Bieber as a personality to
avoid:
“Like Justin Bieber, it feels very girly and no, that would never appeal
to me. There are probably many similar things. […] It would
31
absolutely make me to deliberately avoid that brand if he was to be
their spokesperson. Someone like Justin Bieber, he is not a sane
person.”
A5 (male, 24)
Participant B7 contributed another example of celebrity endorsement
regarding Socialdemokraterna, one of the biggest political parties in Sweden,
found in appendix 3. B7 believed that their choice of endorser, a comedian,
made them look non-serious and more business minded than a political party
should:
Furthermore, some consumers felt disturbed of companies using direct
marketing as they were intruding into their privacy. Participant B4 shared a
story of an electricity provider, Din El that continued to call each week, which
at last led to complete brand avoidance:
“I have been called by a company regarding procurement of
electricity many times by Din El in Gothenburg. They called me every
week and kept nagging, finally I said that you cannot call me more, I
will not purchase electricity from you.”
B4 (male, 28)
Lastly, participant A5 experienced a similar story but via e-mail. The company
Northlander that organizes ski-trips send out e-mails, which has led to
irritation from the participant, found in appendix 3. The statement describes
the weekly personal letter from the CEO as annoying and therefore the
participant engage in service brand avoidance.
32
5 Analysis
The following chapter analyses and shows how the empirical findings can be
interpreted to the already existing literature but also new findings applying to the
service industry. All of the five categories are presented with several sub-themes to
show the reader how the results are relevant for both existing literature and new
material.
The interpretation of the data collected revealed that all consumers avoided
several types of service brands, even though they were not always conscious
about the avoidance in the first place. Sometimes it was difficult for the
consumers to identify the actual driver of brand avoidance, and some
participants were not aware of the reason for the excluded consumption. They
even wanted to avoid a specific brand but due to difficulties, such as
monopolies, the avoidance could be problematic to accomplish.
When examining the drivers of service brand avoidance, the difficulty for the
consumers to identify the avoidance of services was obvious, and thus easier
recognized on products (B1; B7). This could be closely connected to the
undesired self, and the rejection in consumption (Hogg & Banister, 2001). A
service is intangible in its nature (Wilson et al., 2012), while a product is
tangible. A service cannot be seen, felt, tasted, or touched (Wilson et al., 2012)
and the attributes from it might be more difficult to connect to the selfidentity, hence the rejection of a product brand could easier be recognized in
the consumer's mind. However, the avoidance of service brands is still
apparent to the same extent after conducting semi-structured interviews,
which after discussion and some help for the participants, revealed that all the
consumers consciously avoided one or more service brands. Moreover, in
some occasions, the consumers could not identify a specific brand to avoid,
however, the drivers to brand avoidance were obvious (B5; B6; A5; A7).
Furthermore, Olivia et al. (1992) offer the idea that the anti-thesis to brand
avoidance is brand loyalty. The loyalty to a brand might lead to avoidance of
another brand, even though they are perfectly congruent to the consumers’
wants and needs (A4). Another example of H&M from participant A3 showed
that the loyalty might also be an influencing factor whether scandals from
great brands will lead to avoidance or not, and the consumer could give the
loyal brand more than one reason to lack in good qualities. Consequently,
brand avoidance is not always a solely factor given when consumers
deliberately avoid brands, as brand loyalty was proven to be an influencer
when favouring certain brands and in the decision of which brands to avoid.
Earlier findings support this behaviour by stating that brand loyalty consists
of both acceptance and rejection of brands (Jacoby & Kyner, 1973). However,
when studying brand avoidance, the literature of that specific phenomenon is
lacking due to few viewpoints of rejection, and therefore requires a more
comprehensive approach.
The findings revealed that service brands could be avoided due to many
33
different drivers. From the interviews the authors were able to connect the
findings with previous literature, but also some new conclusions regarding the
service industry. The sub-themes on each category mentioned in the empirical
findings should therefore be explained in more depth.
Experential
Avoidance
Identity
Avoidance
Moral
Avoidance
Poor Service
Performance
Negative
Reference
Group
Ethical Issue
Servicescape
Brand Image
Inconvenience
Deindividuation
Anti-hegemony
Cultural
Dependency
Political
Engagement
DeficitValue
Avoidance
Cost
Perception/
Expectation
Unfamiliarity
Marketing
Avoidance
Response of
Content
Celebrity
Endorser
Music
Direct
Marketing
Figure 5.1 Service Brand Avoidance Framework
Source: Developed by the authors
5.1 Experiential Avoidance
Findings from the interviews evidently proved that a personally experienced
event could be critical as the occurrence is the main reference point in relation
to expectations when evaluating the service quality (Wilson et al., 2012). Since
a service is produced at the same time it is consumed, the consumers showed
that the direct experience highly affects the expectations versus actual
performance. Hence, the definite quality from the service is a result of the
experience, and may therefore be crucial for the success where negative
experiences lead to avoidance (Wilson et al., 2012).
Experiential avoidance was identified by Lee et al. (2009b) as one of the main
categories for brand avoidance. In line with previous literature, the authors
recognized experiential avoidance as one of the main categories in service
brand avoidance as well. The findings clearly show that experience-based
scenarios are the most common of all drivers to deliberately avoid a service
brand. The sub-themes identified in the findings were poor service
performance, servicescape, and inconvenience, meaning that all of them
relates back to the framework of Lee et al. (2009b), with some minor changes
more suitable for services.
34
5.1.1 Poor Service Performance
The findings clearly show that poor service performance can lead to service
brand avoidance. Unmet expectations for the customer may cause negative
experiences, which in turn leads to avoidance. Numerous participants
mentioned that they had other expectations than the actual delivery of the
service, leading to a greater disappointment and due to unmet beliefs, service
brand avoidance. For instance, participant B2 experienced unmet
expectations when renting an apartment for vacation in Italy. The built up
expectations were based on pictures provided by SEMBO, and when B2
arrived to the apartment it did not meet the expectations. This phenomenon
can be found in existing literature, regarding a service that does not fill the
requirement for the adequate service expected, and consequently results in
service failure where the customer leaves the company and never return
(Wilson et al., 2012; Lee et al., 2009a; Kelley et al., 1993). This obviously
proves that a brand has to fulfil expectations, however, these are personal and
sometimes difficult to anticipate. The results from the interviews
demonstrates that poor performance as a driver was one of the most common
reasons for brand avoidance, thus firms have to be careful with how they are
anticipated. If the pictures from SEMBO would have been closer to reality, the
customers would have known what to expect, thus a failure of the service
could have been circumvented.
Furthermore, an example where general expectations played its role and led to
service brand avoidance was shared from participant A3, found in appendix 3.
A visit at the fast food chain Pizza Hut made her wait for two hours, which
through the general perception is considered longer than expected since it is a
fast food chain. First hand experiences that are negative can result in
avoidance (Lee et al., 2009a), and in this case, the reliability of being served
on time led to poor service performance. This is a rather exaggerated example,
where any customer would have been disappointed of the service failure.
However, it still illustrates that poor performance leads to service brand
avoidance when the service of the firm is greatly lacking, and a reasoned
driver to deliberately avoid the service.
Moreover, participant A4 spoke about a restaurant where an app has replaced
several of the personnel's duties and the dissatisfaction of the restaurant was
rooted in the lack of service. Since the personnel interact with the customers,
they are creators of the service, but if the main service originators are
removed, the service may have a difficulty in realising its purposes. Poor
service performance can therefore also derive from the lack of service, since
the personnel have a leading role in the service industry as they have a large
effect on the brand and how it is perceived (De Chernatony et al., 2004). As
the literature declares, expertise provided by personnel increase the credibility
of the service as well as an adequate relationship between customer and
personnel heighten the quality (Wilson et al., 2012). By a stronger relationship
between these two, a service can be perceived as more dependable. Participant
A3’s dissatisfaction of SJ proves that a lacking reliability of the company is the
main driver to brand avoidance. The firm must therefore increase the
credibility and improve the service in terms of reliability in order for the
customers to gain back trust. This type of avoidance might be difficult to
35
manage, since a service with deficient performance is useless and
exchangeable.
5.1.2 Servicescape
The servicescape is a critical factor for a service, and an insufficient
environment has been proven a driver for service brand avoidance. The
servicescape refers to tangibles in relation to the facility where the service is
carried out. These tangibles are often used for the customer to evaluate the
service making the servicescape a highly important factor when delivering
services (Wilson et al., 2012). The findings clearly show the impact of the
servicescape on the service experience. As seen in appendix 3, participant B1,
B3, B4, and B8 all described issues regarding the servicescape of Ryanair and
how it impacted their negative attitude towards the brand. This relates back to
previous literature by Bitner (2012) who state that negative emotions
connected to the servicescape could create negative emotions towards the
brand. The negative emotions towards the brand might later result in service
brand avoidance.
Participant A1 further highlights the issue of an unhygienic atmosphere, which
has led to avoidance of Scandic. The evaluation of the service clearly depends
on the servicescape as the satisfaction is not fulfilled, and the production of
the service is visible in a displeased manner. Another clear example is from
participant A2, found in appendix 3, regarding a gym where the servicescape
is experienced too small and lacks of important equipment. The unmet
expectations of the layout of the gym create negative emotions and
consequently service brand avoidance, hence it proves that the servicescape
generates in either positive knowledge of the brand or as a driver to avoid it.
5.1.3 Inconvenience
Inconvenience has been identified as a reason for brand avoidance both in the
findings from interviews and in previous literature. Keaveney (1995)
discovered several components along with inconvenience that may cause
brand switching. However, Lee et al. (2009a) argue that the same components
may cause brand avoidance, and hence inconvenience may cause brand
avoidance. Participant B6 described the inconvenient relationship to Apple,
and the reason for avoiding the brand was based on the factor that Apple's
software was controlled and added redundant complications. The hassled
factor carried was the fundamental driver for the consumer to avoid the
brand; therefore an easier applicability of the service would possibly prevent
the avoidance.
Inconvenience does not only involve limited usage depending on choices.
Participant B8, found in appendix 3 shared an example where the
inconvenience of his insurance company was amplified due to contrast from a
friend who went through a simpler procedure with another insurance
company regarding the same issue. The expectations were unmet since B8 had
perceived the promise from Dina Försäkringar through various channels as
the simple company. Grönroos (2006) anchors the idea in previous literature
where a promise consequently leads to the expectation of the service. As
36
mentioned, when the expectations are unmet by reality, service failure may
occur (Wilson et al., 2012). Consequently, participant B8’s perceived value of
the service also decreased because of a comparison of the two insurance
companies, and the dissatisfaction might have been experienced differently if
the competing brand was worse in its performance.
5.2 Identity Avoidance
A customer’s identity can be contradictory to a brand’s value and therefore
incongruent to the self-concept (Lee et al., 2009a). The findings showed that
others perception, as well as the contrasting self-image to a brand’s or the
customer’s identity, are drivers for an avoidance. The interviews discovered
different drivers for identity avoidance, and have therefore been divided into
following sub-themes: negative reference group, brand image, and
deindividuation. Two of these underlying categories could be found in
previous studies by Lee et al. (2009b), but brand image is added to the revised
model.
5.2.1 Negative Reference Group
In the first out of three sub-categories of identity avoidance, the participants
stated that their self-identity differentiated from other customers. This could
be supported by earlier studies showing that brands are to be avoided when
consumers want to protect their identity (Lee et al., 2009a). In the example of
the brand Barbershop, participant A5 distanced the self-image from the
already existing customers. The avoidance was associated with a negative
reference group due to the fact that the service was symbolically opposing to
the individual’s sense of self (Lee et al., 2009a). The reason for the avoidance
might not be very precise since A5 had a more generalised image of the brand
user, and felt a need of avoidance because of distinct features (Elsbach &
Bhattacharya, 2001; Lee et al., 2009a). However, the stereotypical image of
the brand users was an adequate driver leading to service brand avoidance.
Even though the participant clarified that the deliberately avoidance was due
to unknown reasons, the underlying reason for the prevention was clearly
because of the negative reference group of the brand.
Furthermore, participant A3’s statement concerning KappAhl and the
deliberate avoidance towards the brand, is an example of a symbolically
unappealing promise because of the negative reference group. The quality of a
service does not have to be a determining factor, and the brand itself could not
influence the consumers’ perception of the current consumers to the same
extent. It is rather how the values of the brand and specifically how the
customers are incongruent with the self-concept (Lee et al., 2009a). Hogg and
Banister (2001) state that the undesired self could lead to a rejection of
services. However, the main reason for the avoidance of participant A3 is not
as precise as when avoiding due to the undesired self, since the negative image
of the brand user is not very concrete. Also the fact that the self-image
opposed the overall and generalised image of the current customers supports
the interpretation of the main driver to be negative reference group.
37
5.2.2 Brand Image
The second cause leading to identity avoidance could be connected to the fact
that the participants found it difficult to identify themselves with the image of
the brand, but also a generally bad image, or due to a failure in conveying the
core service through the brand image. The distinction between negative
reference group and brand image is that brand image is closer connected to
the anticipation of the brand itself, while a negative reference group contains
the users of the brand to a greater extent.
It is important for a company to expose the right vision and the image of their
service. An issue that might occur is a gap between what the firm wants to
convey and how the consumer interpret the brand (Rosenbaum-Elliott, Percy
& Pervan, 2015). According to participant B7 as seen in appendix 3, Schenker
has failed in carrying the right perception and message of the actual service.
B7 realised the difficulty to identify with the brand but also what service the
firm actually delivered, and hence a misunderstanding arose. The firm’s actual
image was incongruent with the interpreted image of the participant. This
shows that a consumer can construct causal inferences about a brand and the
functional qualities with no basis in reality (Rosenbaum-Elliott et al., 2015).
Participant B7’s avoidance proves that the service functionality conveyed has
failed and the brand image is consequently a driver for the consumer to
intentionally avoid Schenker.
Participant A7 connected the brand Ryanair with negative associations due to
the bad brand image. A favourable brand image has positive effects on
consumer behaviour towards the brand and will consequently increase loyalty
and generate in word-of-mouth (Lee, Lee & Wu, 2011). However, it could also
have the opposite influence leading to brand avoidance, in this case Ryanair
that according to the participant has a bad image on the market. It does not
have to be personal experiences creating the image of the brand, but a
construction of negative inferences. Furthermore, the mobile operator 3 was
perceived with a bad brand identity of participant A4 with a lack of trust,
because of bad word-of-mouth and the own perception of the brand image.
The participant did not have personal experiences of the brand, but had only
construct an own causal interpretation that led to service brand avoidance.
The findings show that a company could obviously constantly attempt to
improve the brand image, but the perception of the brand lies in the hands of
the customers, and could be due to other factors than the actual quality
features.
5.2.3 Deindividuation
The last findings in the third sub-category identified that participants were
cynical to brands representative to mainstream characteristics. This could also
be connected to the self-identity perspective, and the fact that consumers
abstain from a mainstream brand in order to uphold the identity. Consumers
want to create personal characteristics and the negative features of
consumption of certain brands may carry a bad symbolic meaning for the
identity (Lee et al., 2009a). In the findings, B8 avoided Snapchat, which was
considered a mainstream brand, and could therefore damage individuality for
the participant. This finding, as well as the two earlier mentioned drivers, does
38
not have any connection to the function of the service, meaning that the driver
might be hard for a brand to circumvent since it is personal reasons and not
the brand itself.
5.3 Moral Avoidance
Moral avoidance is, contrary to all other type of avoidances, driven by the
immediate impact of well being of the consumer (Lee et al., 2009a).
Participants from the interviews stated and proved the reflection upon the
firm’s role in the society rather than personal reasons to avoid a brand. The
drive to avoid brands was motivated by socially decreasing brand promises,
and as identified in previous literature, moral brand avoidance occurs when
the brand’s values are incongruent with the personal ideological beliefs (Lee et
al., 2009b). In relation to the discovered sub-categories of Lee et al. (2009b),
the category anti-hegemony is persistent, country effects has been revised to
cultural dependency, and two additional sub-categories have been identified:
ethical issues and political engagement. The dimension in the revised model
by the authors is rather extensive, as moral avoidance has been found to have
a greater scope of drivers.
5.3.1 Anti-hegemony
What consumers personally might perceive as unethical activities could
strongly affect the reason to participate in service brand avoidance. This was
supported by participant B6, found in appendix 3, who believed that the
service Tidal was wrongly executed since the owners wanted to “earn money
again”. The fact that the company was initially created by people with large
companies was seen as a driver to prevent a support of continuous growth. B6
considered the owners to be multimillionaires with no need to earn more
money, and therefore avoided the brand, neither could the participant see an
ethical trade-off where the already wealthy artists wanted to make more
money, hence a rejection of the brand. Previous literature by Holt (2002)
describes the phenomenon as against domination, where consumers may
avoid leading brands to prevent the growth of monopolies or large
corporations. The effect of the brands may affect the wider society and moral
aspects could come in play since it is built on ideological foundations of the
consumer (Lee et al., 2009b).
5.3.2 Ethical Issues
In contrast to anti-hegemony, ethical issues was found to be more related to
unethical occurrences that might affect the society in a wider perspective with
more deep-rooted rights and wrong of humanity. This newly found sub-theme
was crucial as the interviews proved that ethical issues themselves were a
wider problem identified in service brand avoidance. In the study of
Strandvik, Rindell and Wilén (2013) it can be found that consumers that are
strongly value-based may reject brands, thus engage in brand avoidance. In
the context if this paper, ethical issues concern business ethics and the values,
principles, and standards they are perceived to be incongruent with in the
business world (Ferrell, Fraedrich & Ferrell, 2011). How socially related
events in the business world can be connected to brand avoidance was shown
39
by participant A4 who commented upon Telia Sonera and the involvement of
scandals in Gibraltar and Azerbaijan. The great scandals of the company had
changed A4’s perception of the brand, and also generated in lost of trust. The
company is blamed for unethical actions by the participant and the negative
publicity of the brand is a driver to brand avoidance.
Some participants from the interviews did not care enough about moral issues
in order to consciously avoid brands, mainly because the problems were not
closely connected to personal relations, the difficulty to embrace the issues
supplied far from the consumer, and the fact that more affordable options
were time-consuming to find. The ones more aware of the ethical issues of the
society truly avoided a brand fundamentally because of trust issues from the
scandals. However, in the end, the avoidance due to ethical issues was not
based on empathy for those exposed, but founded in the fear of being the
victim of dishonesties themselves.
Moreover, participant B7 brought up another example of ethical concerns
towards the wider society. B7 believed that grading in high schools in Sweden
were done inconsequently by comparing private high schools and communal
high schools. The participant showed that the easily acquired grades at the
private schools became an issue for other students and ethically incorrect
since it was at an expense of others when applying for university or college.
The participant perceived the occurrence to be ethically wrong which
subsequently affected the society as a whole.
5.3.3 Cultural Dependency
The third sub-theme cultural dependency is similar to country effects in the
framework of Lee et al. (2009b). Previous literature states that negative
feelings towards a country could cause brands that originate from that country
to be avoided. Consumers may also refuse to contribute to the economical
growth of that country. However, services are inseparable from its provider
neither can it be stored (Wilson et al., 2012). This complicates the idea of
refusing a service from another country since it is often provided in the
country the service is used. Findings show that cultural dependencies may
occur in similar ways as in the model of Lee et al. (2009b), but the limitation
and avoidance is based on what is perceived as culturally accepted.
Participant B5 revealed an avoidance of a cleaning service if the firm used
child labour in Sweden, and the fact that the participant accepted child labour
to another extent in other countries, evidently shows that culture dependency
is the foundation to the service brand avoidance. Moreover, B6 also described
how avoidance of cleaning services in Sweden might appear since it becomes
an ethical dilemma, but in another poorer country where people might
“deserve” the rights to use this type of help, the ethical dilemma is not evident.
Subsequently, the fundamental driver of this avoidance was proven to have its
basis in the country of origin, as the sub-category of Lee et al. (2009b).
However, the main issue in the latest findings is not based in the origin
country of the brand, but from where the consumer derives in terms of
culture.
40
5.3.4 Political Engagement
Previous literature in brand avoidance has been focusing solely on political
aspects as the only driver for brand avoidance (Sandıkçı & Ekici, 2009), but
later studies have proven several other categories as drivers of brand
avoidance (Lee et al., 2009b). However, the political aspect is still apparent
when a brand is strongly related to a political opinion. Participant A2’s
statement regarding the avoidance of the union is a clear example of political
engagement as a driver for brand avoidance, since it depends on the fact that
the firm is politically involved when it should not. Political engagement
avoidance may also occur if the brand’s political beliefs are not in line with the
individual’s beliefs (Sandıkçı & Ekici, 2009). As politics is somewhat sensitive
as a topic for some individuals, brands have to carefully decide the
involvement of politics in the strategy of the business. Moral avoidance has
been well recognized as a driver of service brand avoidance, and the political
engagement of the brand is not an exception. In the case of A2, the brand
should not have been politically involved to any extent, but brand avoidance
due to political drivers has also been found to contain political beliefs of a
company incongruent with the consumers principles. Furthermore, the
political standpoint of a brand’s spokesperson as a driver of brand avoidance
is also discussed in the category marketing avoidance.
5.4 Deficit-value Avoidance
The unacceptable relationship between price and quality was a given factor
from the participants in the interviews. The category deficit-value avoidance
was initially identified by Lee et al. (2009b) with the same name, and the
latest findings specify that the price is an indicator of the quality of the
product. The findings from the interviews are formed by three sub-themes:
cost perception, quality caution, and unfamiliarity. All of the sub-themes can
be found in the studies of Lee et al. (2009b), but with renamed titles.
5.4.1 Cost Perception
The price-quality relationship was mentioned several times during the
interviews. Numerous examples were given when the price was low and
therefore the quality of the service was perceived as inferior. Lee et al. (2009b)
show that consumers avoid budget brands they believe are of low quality, and
they also argue that price is an influencer of how the quality is interpreted.
This could be linked to the examples with the hairdressers where both
consumers perceived the brands to be inadequate in service if the price was
too low (A5; A7). The participants believed that the brands decreased in
trustworthiness and quality, mainly based on the price perception. This could
be further supported by the studies of Kardes, Cronley, Kellaris and Posavac
(2004), showing that consumers persistently rely on price as a quality cue
even when the characteristics of the service can be found. Therefore, the
findings further prove that the price range of services, as well as products, is a
fundamental strategy for businesses, indicating that a low price does not
necessarily attract customers. The brand must therefore evaluate whether the
service provided could use a low price or if it requires a higher price in order
for it to be perceived as good quality. Moreover, participant B7 who actively
avoided the mobile operators Hallon and Halebop, was also cautious about
41
the quality of the service, giving the expression “better safe than sorry”, which
could also be linked to the category deficit-value avoidance developed by Lee
et al. (2009b). He argued that the higher price of another service was a more
acceptable trade-off than paying a lower price and consequently had to be
unaware of the actual quality of the service received. This is an interesting
finding since the participant believes that the low-price brands are adequate
in quality, but choose the more expensive brands regardless. It is probably an
inconsistent pattern of behaviour, and therefore difficult to prevent, but still a
thought-provoking discovery of the research.
In contrast, some participants argued that a higher price does not necessarily
indicate a more adequate quality. Consumers avoided premium brands
because of the insufficient value it created, and it only added extra profit to
the company, hence the brand was identified as being deficit in value (Lee et
al., 2009b). The deliberate avoidance of Hilton hotel due to inadequate value
the high price gives, showed that consumers does not always connect
premium brands with better quality, or at least not the acceptable relationship
between price and quality that they require (A4). Opposing to the expression
“better safe than sorry”, the consumer believed the brand to offer the same
quality of service, and consequently purchased the cheaper alternative.
Service brands with a higher price that want to be perceived as premium
quality must therefore provide the consumers with something extra, otherwise
there is a great risk of being replaced. Contrasting to products, service brands
does not have a product connected to a logo in the same way, which can
increase the value of the brand for some people, and must therefore provide
the customer with additional value in the quality of the service.
5.4.2 Unfamiliarity
The unfamiliarity with brands was a further driver for avoidance. Participant
B5 felt that the experience of shopping at ICA was a reason to avoid Coop
since the comparison of the two services made Coop appear inferior. This
phenomenon can arise when consumers compare unfamiliar brands with
brands that are more recognizable, and consequently believe those brands to
be lower in quality and higher in risk (Richardson et al., 1996). The avoidance
did not only occurred because of the loyalty of ICA, but due to unfamiliarity
with a brand that created an unawareness of the value they deliver. This type
of avoidance, as mentioned, occurred partly because of brand loyalty of
another brand, and the unfamiliarity is therefore not the only driver to service
brand avoidance and could once again prove that in many cases there are
several factors leading to an avoidance. In this example, the consumer does
not necessarily have bad experiences from Coop, but avoid the brand since the
risk is perceived as high because the familiarity of ICA is more comfortable.
5.5 Marketing Avoidance
According to Knittel et al. (2016) a fifth category was identified as a
compliment to the original model developed by Lee et al. (2009b), namely
advertising. However, the findings show that not only advertising may cause
service brand avoidance but other marketing phenomenon as well.
Subsequently a fifth category has been revised from the model of Knittel et al.
42
(2016). The revised category has three similar sub-categories: content,
celebrity endorsement, and music, but an additional category named direct
marketing has also been added.
5.6 Response of Content
A significant part of marketing is the content of the advertising. Knittel et al.
(2016) identified two different categories regarding content and response, but
the findings from the interviews concerning service brand avoidance, coupled
these two categories into one.
The content can be divided into several components where mainly the story
and the message are important (Knittel et al., 2016). Participant B3 revealed
that one of the fundamental factors to convey and receive the right message
for the consumer was to feel congruent with the content of the advertisement.
The example of B3, regarding an online shoe retailer, broadcasted a
commercial that was perceived as disturbing which led to brand avoidance.
This phenomenon has been established in previous literature by Knittel et al.
(2016) where the content of an advertisement is described as an influencer for
the consumer to dislike a specific advertisement and consequently leading to
brand avoidance (Knittel et al., 2016). In the example of B3, the use of
stereotypical characteristics could be seen as provocative and one of the main
reasons for the consumer to avoid the brand. The consumer received the
message in the wrong way and had negative influences on the buying
intentions (Sabri & Obermiller, 2012).
Moreover, a similar example where the story and the content were disturbing
can be seen in the example of participant B8 in appendix 3. Flygresor.se was
avoided due to annoying content and was seen as non-serious, hence the
strategy of marketing for that brand was inappropriate for the consumer.
According to participant B8, the use of cats could not be linked to a serious
firm, thus another example of failure when conveying a message to the
receiver. Both of these examples show that the content in an advertisement
could lead to service brand avoidance because of the message that the receiver
believe is incongruent with his or her image of what is convincing or not. The
message is dependent on the receiver, and could therefore be interpreted
differently (Kotler et al., 2009). The explanation of the commercial as being
“annoying” is a quite vague example of details described for the avoidance
(Knittel et al., 2016), however it is still a convincing reason enough to not use
the service supported by both previous studies and new findings.
5.6.1 Celebrity Endorser
In order for marketers to convey advertising effectively, the use of celebrities
may be valuable to access consumers. Consumers can create emotions to a
brand as an extension of their perception of a celebrity used in the advertising
(Walker et al., 1992; Apéria & Back, 2004). The findings showed that when a
consumer cannot associate with the celebrity used, brand avoidance might
occur. Participant A5 could not relate to the musician Justin Bieber, and
would therefore avoid purchases of brands using the artist as an endorser. If a
consumer dislikes a celebrity, it can lead to a disapproval of the advertised
43
brand as well, and consequently affect brand avoidance (Knittel et al., 2016).
The participant does not have to have any relations to the brand, but because
of the fact that the perceived image of the celebrity may be associated with a
brand when celebrity endorsement is used, the emotions of the celebrity might
be transferred to the brand (Apéria & Back, 2004). In order for brands to
prevent brand avoidance, firms have to carefully consider if an endorsement
of a celebrity is suitable for their approach and the consumers. In the case of
Justin Bieber, the participant would not even consider to make any purchases
from brands connected to the musician, even though the brand itself is
relevant for the consumer. As other drivers previously mentioned, sometimes
the brand provides the right service, but other external factors have a greater
influence on the consumers purchasing decisions, making businesses main
objectives meaningless.
Moreover, participant B7, as seen in appendix 3, provided another example of
avoidance due to celebrity endorsement. It was not that the consumer could
not identify with the celebrity, but rather that the celebrity used was
unsuitable for the campaign he participated in. This also reveals that a brand
has to be careful when using celebrity endorsement, in order to prevent
service brand avoidance. Earlier studies illustrate that the consumer does not
emphasis on how the advertisement itself is perceived, but to the fact that the
he or she focuses on the endorser of the service (Walker et al., 1992; Apéria &
Back, 2004). Using celebrity endorsement could definitely strengthen the
credibility and likability of the advertisement, but the findings and earlier
studies certainly show that the opposite may occur if it is used wrongly, or at
least in the perception of the consumers.
5.6.2 Music
The music is one of the most commonly used creative tools in advertising
(Lantos & Craton, 2013; Shimp & Andrews, 2013) but findings from the
interviews revealed that the music could negatively affect the perception of the
brand. As seen in appendix 3, flygresor.se was a target for avoidance by
participant A4 due to the annoying music used. The consumer found the
music incredible irritating and consequently avoided the service brand. Music
as a driver of brand avoidance can be found in previous literature established
by Knittel et al. (2016) and it can stimulate customers when making purchase
decisions (Lantos & Craton, 2013; Shimp & Andrews, 2013). The annoying
music of Flygresor.se according to A4 did not have anything to do with the
perception of the firm, but the music itself affected the attitude and purchase
behaviour, and consequently led to service brand avoidance. This is another
example proving that external factors outside the actual service of the brand is
just as important in order to attract customers and to prevent brand
avoidance. The music of an advertisement might not be fundamentally crucial
for the brand to attract or repel consumers as other drivers, such as concrete
experiences, but could still lead to brand avoidance and is therefore an
important part of a firm’s strategy.
44
5.6.3 Direct Marketing
The last category of marketing avoidance that has been found is direct
marketing, complementing to existing literature and well recognized in the
findings. Direct marketing can be defined as a tool to establish direct
communication to customer in order to create response. It includes all types
of communication that is directly targeted towards a consumer, for instance
telemarketing, direct mail, and door-to-door selling (Reynolds & Lancaster,
2007).
According to findings, consumers experienced direct marketing through email as nagging or “too pushy”. Participant A5, found in appendix 3, actively
avoided the firm Northlander due to their advertising since the direct
marketing towards the customers was seen as annoying. The participant
revealed that the brand had raised a type of awareness, however, the
aggressive advertisement was the main reason for him to engage in service
brand avoidance. E-mails as a marketing strategy could create personal
interactions and subsequently generate awareness of the brand, but a
repeated involuntary contact has been found as a driver for brand avoidance.
Also the fact that the messages look similar made the participant press delete
before it was read, as he considered himself to know the content. In
occurrences as these, a brand has failed since the message of the
advertisement was not even received, and the awareness created was solely
negative interpretations of the firm.
Another finding showed that a brand engaging in telemarketing was a reason
for avoiding the brand represented, due to the weekly telephone
conversations. Participant B4 stated that he would never consume Din El
because of their direct marketing tools. Giving the answers from the
participants, this sub-theme of marketing avoidance has been found to be an
important component of the category. Just as the content of an advertisement
could be seen as annoying and lead to brand avoidance, the complete image of
the brand can be seen as inferior if the company uses an aggressive marketing
strategy. This type of approach is not only risky in that particular moment, but
could be suffering continuously in the future since the notion of the brand is
destroyed, and will consequently lead to a deliberate avoidance of a brand.
45
6 Conclusion and Discussion
The last chapter concludes the paper with findings answering the general purpose
of the thesis as well as the research questions. It also discusses contribution of the
study, limitations and suggestions for further research.
6.1 Conclusion
Service brand avoidance is a phenomenon, which has never been exclusively
investigated before. Existing literature of brand avoidance focuses on both
products and services, thus no theories restricted to only services, although
the general model of brand avoidance developed by Lee et al. (2009b) has
worked as a foundation in order to research solely services. The purpose of
this thesis was to identify drivers of service brand avoidance and how they can
be related to previous literature of Lee et al. (2009b) and Knittel et al. (2016).
Through qualitative research methods, deep insights of the phenomenon have
been found, and have therefore generated a slightly revised model, which
represent drivers of service brand avoidance.
1. What are the drivers of brand avoidance in the service industry?
When conducting semi-structured interviews, five categories with
subcategories have been identified as drivers for service brand avoidance:
experiential avoidance, identity avoidance, deficit-value avoidance, moral
avoidance, and marketing avoidance. Experiential avoidance refers to
experiences of services where expectations are unmet or where the
experiences are inconvenient. Identity avoidance appears when the self-image
is incongruent with the brand’s or other consumers’ image. The fourth
category deficit-value avoidance can be described as the relationship between
price and quality, or how unfamiliar brands are to be avoided. Moral
avoidance can be traced to ethics and how consumers avoid brands depending
on their cultural or political beliefs. Lastly, marketing avoidance refers to the
content of advertising, brand connotations, and negative impact of direct
marketing.
2. How can the drivers identified connect to previous research,
primarily done by Lee et al. (2009b) and later revised by Knittel et
al. (2016)?
Most of the drivers identified by Lee et al. (2009b) were consistent in the
service industry, although some of the sub-categories have been either
removed or revised, as well as additional sub-categories have been added. The
experiential avoidance category was relatively similar to what Lee et al.
(2009b) discovered. Certain sub-categories have been changed to titles more
suitable for the service industry, for instance, Lee et al. (2009b) used store
environment where servicescape was a more suitable approach in the service
industry. Poor performance was altered into poor service performance, and
the sub-category inconvenience can be found in the literature of Lee et al.
46
(2009b). Moreover, the empirical findings clearly showed that experiential
avoidance was the most common reason for avoiding service brands.
The second main category of drivers for service brand avoidance, identity
avoidance, can mainly be traced back to existing literature. Two of the found
sub-categories negative reference group as well as deindividuation exist in
Lee et al. (2009b). However, the third identified sub-category, brand image,
has replaced inauthenticity, as it was shown to not be suitable in the study of
services, and the authors subsequently developed the new sub-theme.
Moral avoidance, according to Lee et al. (2009b), consists of two subcategories with another level of sub-themes. One of these two, antihegemony, has been identified in the findings. Country-effect has further
been changed into cultural dependency since the exact same criteria as
country-effect was not met. Furthermore, the following two sub-categories,
ethical issues and political engagement, are both new discoveries in terms of
sub-themes. However, political engagement has been established as a driver
for brand avoidance in previous studies, but not as a separate sub-category.
Regarding deficit-value avoidance, changes have been made compared to the
existing literature. Unfamiliarity was identified in the study, which also can
be found in the work of Lee et al. (2009b). However, the findings show
another category, namely cost perception, which is not apparent in the model
of Lee et al. (2009b) or Knittel et al. (2016), yet consists of some components
from already existing literature.
The last category of brand avoidance identified was marketing avoidance, a
new main category identified by Knittel et al. (2016), although it was called
advertising avoidance. The findings showed that an extended version had to
be made since not only advertising may cause brand avoidance but also other
marketing phenomenon, namely direct marketing. Fundamentally, all subcategories from the advertising category developed by Knittel et al. (2016)
were identified: content, celebrity endorser, music, and, response. However,
content and response now compose one category: response of content.
Figure 5 below demonstrates all categories of service brand avoidance
represented. The blue colour represents what is supported from the model of
Lee et al. (2009b). The yellow colour indicates the categories supported from
Knittel et al. (2016). The red colour represent a new category identified for
service brand avoidance, and at last the dotted line means that the category is
taken from either Lee et al. (2009b) or Knittel et al. (2016) but is revised with
a new name or similar meanings of the category.
47
Experential
Avoidance
Poor Service
Performance
Identity
Avoidance
Negative
Reference Group
Moral
Avoidance
Deficit-Value
Avoidance
Marketing
Avoidance
Ethical Issue
Cost Perception
Response of
Content
Unfamiliarity
Celebrity
Endorser
Servicescape
Brand Image
Anti-hegemony
Inconvenience
Deindividuation
Cultural
Dependency
Music
Political
Engagement
Direct Marketing
Figure 6.1 Adapted Framework for Drivers of Service Brand Avoidance
Source: Developed by the authors (revised from the model of Knittel et al., 2016)
3. Is it possible to draw conclusions regarding all services?
The sub-question was developed as a general question where the answer
depends on the different industries shared by the participants in their
experiences. The findings involved a broad spread of industries mentioned,
which increased the chance of the findings to be general for all service
industries. However, since the field of study was rather unexplored additional
studies may be required in order to draw conclusions regarding the whole
service sector. Although, one may argue that the spread of service brands in
the findings justifies that the developed model regards all services. It must
also be mentioned that there could be unique occasions where the model
might not apply due to the lack of research of the field.
Lastly, it is not proposed for brands to modify their strategy in order to satisfy
all consumers, as brands are not built to please all segments. However, this
research helps to identify drivers for the conscious avoidance of brands for
consumers within the anticipated target group, and to develop a strategy to
avoid causes leading to service brand avoidance.
6.2 Discussion
6.2.1 Contribution
This research contributes to both academic purposes as well as marketing
objectives such as brand management. It can be argued that a wider
perspective of the phenomena brand avoidance, exclusively in the service
industry, has been developed and will consequently lead to contribution in
more than one aspect. As the topic brand avoidance has become more
48
significant to scholars and managers (Lee et al., 2009b) this research is a great
support for both existing literature and future research. The authors believe
the knowledge and understanding of brand avoidance to be fundamental
when examining consumer behaviour.
It is of high importance to understand why consumers have negative attitudes
towards brands, and a contribution to marketing managers could further be
argued by the fact that services have relied upon the assumption of having the
same ideas as traditional product brand management (De Chernatony et al.,
2004). This research shows the negative influences consumers may perceive
as a contributor to service brand avoidance, and could help marketers to find
an approach managing to circumvent the deliberate avoidance of services to a
greater extent in the future. The study evidently illustrates the drivers of
service brand avoidance and the various contributing factors, compared with
products only. The interpretation of the new findings and the revised model
are therefore useful in brand management.
In addition, the findings will contribute for scholars in the use of the model
revised exclusively for the service sector. A deeper understanding of solely
service brands has been examined compared to the framework developed by
Lee et al. (2009b), later revised by Knittel et al. (2016), and should therefore
be used in further studies of the subject concerning service brands.
6.2.2 Limitations of the research
The limitations of this study are fundamentally based on the sample used for
the interviews. Table 1 shows the different ages of the participants, where only
a few differentiate from the age span of 22-28 years old. In the same table it is
noticeable that almost every participant is a student, and can therefore be
seen as a limitation as it is not representative for the full population.
Furthermore, the deliberate decision of only interviewing Swedes may be
considered another issue of not being a motivating research sampling to
represent the full population. However, this study would not have been
feasible if these measures had not been taken due to both financial shortage
and time limits. Another issue that occurred was the fact that participants of
the interviews had a difficulty in recalling brand avoidance experiences or
stories related to services. However, this might be a subject for future research
to solve in order to continue the examination of service brand avoidance.
6.2.3 Future research
In connection to the issue of recalling actual stories or experiences regarding
services, a suggestion for future research would be to extend the research by
building on the same idea of identifying drivers of service brand avoidance. In
order to continue this field of research, a repetitive study and to crossreference the result is an endorsed method considered by the authors of this
paper. A further argued approach of research is to incorporate focus groups
together with interviews to develop the most generalised results. This method
might eliminate the difficulties for participants to recall stories related to
services and receive stimulus from other contributors during the focus groups.
49
Since the field of service brand avoidance is relatively unexplored there are
many ways to encounter the issues of service brand avoidance. An important
aspect would be to conduct quantitative studies in order to secure a general
image of the full population. It can be done with this study as support or as a
reference point when developing a measurement scale of service brand
avoidance needed for testing hypotheses regarding the topic.
Lastly, as this thesis focus solely on investigating services in general, a
suggestion for future research would be to focus on one trade or branch of
industry. This would generate important insights both for the branch itself but
also for this research, whether it can be confirmed or not.
50
7 References
American Marketing Association (2013a). Dictionary, Definition of Brand.
Retrieved February 15, 2016 from,
http://www.marketingpower.com/_layouts/Dictionary.aspx?dLetter=B
Apéria, T., & Back, R. (2004). Brand Relations Management: Bridging the Gap
Between Brand Promise and Brand Delivery. Malmö: Liber AG, CBS Press.
Arnold, M.J., Reynolds, K.E., Ponder, N., & Lueg, J.E. (2005). Customer delight
in a retail context: Investigating delightful and terrible shopping experiences.
Journal of Business Research, 58(8), 1132-1145.
Banister, E. N., & Hogg, M. K. (2004). Negative symbolic consumption and
consumers' drive for self-esteem: The case of the fashion industry. European
Journal of Marketing, 38(7), 850-868.
Berry, L. (2000). Cultivating service brand equity. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science 28(1), 128–37.
Bitner, M. (1992) Servicescapes: The Impact of Physical Surroundings on
Customers and Employees. Journal of Marketing, 56(2), 55-71.
Calabrese, A. (2012). Service productivity and service quality: A necessary tradeoff? International Journal of Production Economics, 135, 800–812.
Cherrier, H., Black, I. R., & Lee, M. (2011). Intentional non-consumption for
sustainability. Consumer resistance and/or anti-consumption? European
Journal of Marketing, 45(11/12), 1757-1767.
Clifton, R. (2009). Brands and Branding (2nd ed.). New York: Bloomberg Press.
Crosby, P. B. (1979). Quality is free: The Art of Making Quality Certain. New
York: New American Library.
Dall’Olmo Riley, F., & De Chernatony, L. (2000), The service brand as
relationship builder. British Journal of Management, 11, 137-50.
De Chernatony, L., Drury, S., & Segal‐ Horn, S. (2004). Identifying and
sustaining services brands' values. Journal of Marketing Communications,
10(2), 73-93.
De Chernatony, L., & Riley, F. D. (1998). Defining a “brand”: Beyond the
literature with experts’ interpretations. Journal of Marketing Management, 14,
417-443.
Elsbach, K. D., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Defining who you are by what
you're not: organizational disidentification and the National Rifle Association.
Organization Science, 12(4), 393–413.
51
Ferrell, O. C., Fraedrich, J., & Ferrell, L. (2011). Buisness Ethics: Ethical
Decision Making & Cases (8th ed.). South-Western: Cengage Learning.
Friedman, M. (1985). Consumer boycotts in the United States, 1970–1980:
contemporary events in historical perspective. The Journal of Consumer
Affairs, 19(1), 96–117.
Green, J. M., Draper, A. K., & Dowler, E. A. (2003). Short cuts to safety: risk and
‘rules of thumb’ in accounts of food choice. Health, Risk & Society, 5(1), 33.
Grönroos, C. (2006). On defining marketing: Finding a new roadmap for
marketing. Marketing Theory, 6(4), 395-417.
Harrison-Walker, L. J. (2001). E-complaining: a content analysis of an Internet
complaint forum. Journal of Services Marketing, 15(5), 397-412.
He, H., Li, Y., & Harris, L. C. (2012). Social identity perspective on brand
loyalty. Journal of Business Research, 65(5), 648-657.
Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, Voice and Loyalty: Responses to declines in
Firms, Organizations, and States. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Hodge, R., & Kress, G. (1993). Language as ideology. London: Routledge.
Hogg, M. K., & Banister, E. N. (2001). Dislikes, Distastes and the Undesired self:
Conceptualising and Exploring the Role of the Undesired End State in
Consumer Experience. Journal of Marketing Management, 17(1/2), 73–104.
Hogg, M. K., Banister, E. N., & Stephenson, C. A. (2009). Mapping symbolic
(anti-) consumption. Journal of Business Research, 62, 148-159.
Holt, D. B. (2002). Why do brands cause trouble? A dialectical theory of
consumer culture and branding. Journal of Consumer Research, 29, 70–90.
Iyer, R., & Muncy, J. A. (2009). Purpose and object of anti-consumption.
Journal of Business Research, 62, 160-168.
Jacoby, J., & Kyner, D. B. (1973). Brand loyalty vs. repeat purchasing behaviour.
Journal of Marketing Research, 10(1), 1-9.
Kapferer, J. N. (2012). The new strategic Brand Management. Advanced
Insights & Strategic Thinking (5th ed.). London: Kogan Page Limited.
Kardes, F. R., Cronley, M. L., Kellaris, J. J., & Posavac, S. S. (2004). The Role of
Selective Information Processing in Price-Quality Inference. Journal of
Consumer Research, 31(2), 368–74.
Keaveney, S. (1995). Customer switching behaviour in service industries: An
exploratory study. Journal of Marketing, 59(2), 71-82.
52
Keller, K. L. (2008). Strategic Brand Management. Building, Measuring and
Managing Brand Equity (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Kelley, S. W., Hoffman, K. D., & Davis, M. A. (1993). A typology of retail failures
and recoveries. Journal of Retailing, 69(4), 429–52. Knittel, Z., Beurer, K., & Berndt, A. (2016). Brand avoidance among Generation
Y consumers. An International Journal, 19(1), 27-43.
Kotler, P., Keller, K. L., Brady, M., Goodman, M., & Hansen, T. (2009).
Marketing Management. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Lantos, G. P., & Craton, L. G. (2012). A model of consumer response to
advertising music. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 29(1), 22-42.
Lee, M. S. W., Conroy, D., & Motion, J. (2009b). Brand Avoidance: A Negative
Promises Perspective. Advances in Consumer Research, 36, 421-429.
Lee, M. S. W., Fernandez, K. V., & Hyman, M. R. (2009c). Editorial. Anticonsumption: An overview and research agenda. Journal of Business Research,
62, 145-147.
Lee, H. M, Lee, C. C., & Wu, C.C. (2011). Brand image strategy affects brand
equity after M&A. European Journal of Marketing, 45(7/8), 1091 – 1111.
Lee, M. S. W., Motion, J., & Conroy, D. (2009a). Anti-consumption and brand
avoidance. Journal of Business Research, 62, 169–180.
Liao, S., Chou, C. Y., & Lin, T. H. (2015). Adverse behavioural and relational
consequences of service innovation failure. Journal of Business Research,
68(4), 834-839.
Lopes, M., & Sicilia, M. (2013). How WOM marketing contributes to new
product adoption: Testing competitive communication strategies. European
Journal of Marketing, 47(7), 1089-1114.
McColl-Kennedy, J. R., Patterson, P.G., Smith, A. K., & Brady, M. K. (2009).
Customer rage episodes: Emotions, expressions and behaviors. Journal of
Retailing, 85(2), 222-237.
Olivia, T. A., Oliver, R. L., & MacMillan I. C. (1992). A catastrophe model for
developing service satisfaction strategies. Journal of Marketing, 56, 83–95. Parasuraman, A., Berry L. L., & Zeithaml V. A. (1991). Refinement and
reassessment of the SERVQUAL scale. Journal of Retailing, 67, 420–451.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., & Berry, L. L. (1985), A conceptual model of
service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of Marketing,
49(4), 41-50.
53
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L. (1988a). SERVQUAL: a multipleitem scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of
Retailing, 64(1), 12-29.
Parasuraman, A., Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L. (1988b). SERVQUAL: a multipleitem scale for measuring consumer perceptions. Journal of Retailing, 64(1), 1229.
Penaloza, L., & Price, L. L. (1993). Consumer Resistance: a Conceptual
Overview. Advances in Consumer Research, 20, 123-128.
Percy, L., & Elliott, R. (2009). Strategic Advertising Management (3rd ed.).
New York: Oxford University Press.
Quinton, S. (2013). The digital era requires new knowledge to develop relevant
CRM strategy: A cry for adopting social media research methods to elicit this
new knowledge. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 21(5), 402-412.
Reynolds, P., & Lancaster, G. (2007). Marketing Made Simple. Oxford: Elsevier
Science.
Richardson, P. S., Jain, A. K., & Dick, A. (1996). Household store brand
proneness: A framework. Journal of Retailing, 72(2), 159-85.
Rosenbaum-Elliott, R., Percy, L., & Pervan, S. (2015). Strategic brand
management (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sabri, O., & Obermiller, C. (2012). Consumer perception of taboo in ads.
Journal of Business Research, 65(6), 869-873.
Sandıkçı, Ö., & Ekici, A. (2009). Politically motivated brand rejection. Journal
of Business Research, 62, 208-217.
Sandström, S., Edvardsson, B., Kristensson, P., & Magnusson, P. (2008). Value
in use through service experience. An International Journal, 18(2), 112-126.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2012). Research Methods for Business
Students (6th ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Shimp, T. A., & Andrews, J. C. (2013). Advertising Promotion and Other
Aspects of Integrated Marketing Communications. Mason: Cengage Learning.
Srivastava, R. K., Fahey, L., & Christensen, H. K. (2001). The resource-based
view and marketing: the role of market-based assets in gaining competitive
advantage. Journal of Management, 27(6), 777–802.
Strandvik, O., Rindell, A., & Wilén, K. (2013). Ethical consumers' brand
avoidance. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 22(7), 484-490.
Walker, M., Langmeyer, L., & Langmeyer, D. (1992). Celebrity Endorsers: Do
you get what you pay for? The Journal of Consumer Marketing, 9(2), 69-76.
54
Wilk, R.R. (1997). A critique of desire: Distaste and dislike in consumer
behaviour. Consumption Markets and Culture, 1(2), 175-196.
Wood, L. (2000). Brands and brand equity: definition and management.
Management Decision, 38(9), 662-669.
Woodwell, D. (2014). Research foundations, how do we know what we know?
Thousands Oaks: SAGE Publications.
Yin, R.K. (2011). Doing Qualitative Research From Start to Finish. New York:
Guilford Press.
Zavestoski, S. (2002). Guest editorial: Anticonsumption attitudes. Psychology
and Marketing, 19(2), 121-126.
55
Appendices
Appendix 1 – Interview Guidelines
Interviews
Datum:
Intervjukod:
Ålder:
Kön:
Intervjun börjar med att definiera vad ett varumärke, en tjänst/service och
undvikande av varumärke är.
Vet Du vad ett varumärke är?
Ett varumärke är ett namn, en symbol eller ett tecken, som används för att
identifiera produkter eller tjänster. Det kan till exempel vara ett ord, en logotyp
eller ett koncept som är unikt.
En service/tjänst är immateriella produkter såsom banker, städning,
rådgivning, utbildning, försäkring, medicinsk behandling, eller transport.
Kontrollera så att intervjuobjektet förstår definitionen.
Vilka varumärken inom tjänster använder du vanligtvis?
Vilka varumärken inom servicebranschen gillar du?
Vet du vad undvikande av varumärke är?
[Klargör vad undvikande av ett varumärke är och vad det inte är].
Undvikande av ett varumärke är när en konsument med avsikt väljer att
undvika ett varumärke trots att varumärket är tillgängligt OCH konsumenten
har de finansiella resurser som krävs för att köpa varumärket.
Undvikande av ett varumärke är alltså INTE när ett varumärke är
otillgängligt, oandvändbart eller för dyrt.
Fråga1
Finns det några
servicesektorn?
•
•
varumärken
du
medvetet
undviker
inom
Vilka varumärken skulle du aldrig köpa?
Du nämnde tjänster du vanligtvis tillhandahåller tidigare, finns det några
varumärken inom de kategorier du undviker?
56
Berätta om tidigare upplevelser.
•
•
•
•
•
När var första gången du kom i kontakt med detta varumärke?
Vad är orsaken till att du undviker varumärket? (Till exempel, av egen
erfarenhet, media, andra personers åsikter etc.)
Hur avgör du vilka varumärken som du gillar och vilka du ska undvika?
Hur länge har du undvikit den här tjänsten?
Vad skulle krävas av varumärke X för att du skulle vara villig att ge det en
ny chans och ett nytt köp?
Fråga 2
Tänk dig att du har finansiella resurser som gör det möjligt att köpa
vad som helst samtidigt som alla varumärken finns tillgängliga för
dig. Finns det fortfarande varumärken du skulle undvika?
•
•
Vilka varumärken eller typer av tjänster?
Varför skulle du undvika dessa varumärken?
Fråga 3
Diskutera de 5 olika kategorierna och ställ frågor som ger
intervjuobjektet möjlighet att bekräfta eller dementera huruvida det
är en anledning att medvetet undvika ett varumärke.
•
•
•
•
•
Experential avoidance: Tänk dig att du anlitar en städfirma till
hemmet, men när du sedan kommer hem så inser du att det fortfarande
är smutsigt på vissa ställen och arbetet är dåligt utfört. Skulle det vara en
anledning att undvika den städfirman/varumärket?
Identity avoidance: Tänk dig att en person eller grupp av personer
som du inte tycker om eller sympatiserar med visar att de går till samma
frisör
Deficit-value avoidance: Föreställ dig att du besöker en omtalad
restaurang där du anser att priserna är betydligt högre än vad du
vanligtvis betalar på restuarang. Om då inte upplevelsen på
restaurangbesöket lever upp till dina förväntningar och du anser att du
betalar ett högre pris för upplevelsen än vad den enligt dina mått inte är
värd, är det en tillräcklig anledning för att i fortsättningen undvika denna
restaruang?
Moral avoidance: Om ett flygbolag du vanligtvis väljer använder sig av
oetiska villkor för de anställda, tex. för långa arbetspass för flyvärdinnor.
Skulle det vara en anledning till att undvika det flygbolaget?
Advertising avoidance: Om en mobiloperatör använder sig av en
kändis i sina reklamannonser som du ogillar av vissa anledningar, hade
det kunnat påverka dig i dina beslut om att fortsättningsvis undvika att
köpa detta varumärke?
När vi nu har diskuterat några olika situationer i vardagen, finns det
några andra anledningar eller situationer som du tror skulle kunna
leda till att Du undviker varumärken inom servicebranschen.
57
•
•
Tror du att det finns andra anledningar som inte berör dig men andra
människor skulle kunna ha för att medvetet undvika varumärken?
Vilken tror du är den största anledningen till att människor undviker
service varumärken?
58
Appendix 2 – Logos used for Interviews
59
Appendix 3 – Transcript Translation
A1 (female, 56)
”På den kedjan har vi bott flera gånger innan, men det stället var ju inte bra…
Till exempel i restaurangen stolarna var ofräscha, det var smutsigt, det kändes
inte fräscht. Städningen fungerande inte på allmänna utrymmen.”
“We have stayed at that chain several times before, but this place was not
good… For instance, the chairs in the restaurant were not fresh, it was dirty,
it did not feel fresh. The cleaning did not work in public area.”
A2 (male, 22)
”Nordic Wellness är ju inte så bra. Jag undviker dem av egen erfarenhet, också
för att andra pratar illa om dem, både och. Jag har mest format min egen
uppfattning. Dem skulle kunna bygga ut, det är för trångt […] Det är väl
miljön och tillgängligheten av olika verktyg eller redskap och liknande…”
“Nordic Wellness is not that good. I avoid them from own experiences, but
also because others talk bad about them. I have mainly created my own
perception. They could consider to make an additional building extension
[…] It is the environment and the accessibility of different tools and the
equipment and so on…”
”Jag stödjer inte facket, de är för politiskt inriktade när de inte borde vara det
överhuvudtaget.”
“I do not support the union, they are too political oriented when they should
not be that at all.”
A3 (female, 25)
”Alltså SJ undviker man ju så mycket man kan, och det är ju just för att de inte
håller tider och är opålitliga.”
“I avoid SJ as much as I can, and it is just because of the fact that they are
not punctual nor reliable.”
”Vi var på Pizzahut en gång, då tog det typ 2 timmar att få maten, så om det
finns andra alternativ så hade jag inte valt de på grund av det.”
“We were at Pizza Hut once, it took almost two hours to get the food, so if
there are other alternatives I would never choose Pizza Hut because of that.”
”Det har ju också betydelse om jag redan är kund eller om jag inte är det. Säg
att jag är kunde hos H&M då till exempel och de kommer fram att de har
barnarbete, då kanske jag fortsätter att handla där för att jag är nöjd med
H&M. Men om jag aldrig har handlat där och får höra att de använder
barnarbete, då kanske jag inte hade gått dit och testat H&M.”
60
“It matter if I am an existing customer or not. If I am a customer at H&M for
instance, and it is revealed that they are using child labour, then I may
continue shopping there because I am happy with H&M. But if I have never
been shopping there before and hear that they are using child labour, then I
might not have been testing H&M.”
”Typ KappAhl skulle jag aldrig gå in på. Där kan det nog ändå vara att man
inte identifierar sig med deras kunder. Det är inte så att man går in där och
tänker att de kanske har något fint, alltså jag går inte ens in där. Men jag har
aldrig handlat där och det är inte så att jag har hört något dåligt om dem, det
är bara det att jag inte identifierar mig med deras image. Det lär man ju ha
byggt på typ reklam och kanske skyltfönster och sånt när man ser vad de har
för varor och modeller. Jag är nog deras målgrupp, men det tilltalar inte mig.”
“Like KappAhl would I never enter. It can probably be that one do not
identify oneself with their customers. It is not like you go in there and think
that they might have something nice, I do not even go in there. But I have
never shopped there, and it is not like I have heard something bad about
them, It is just that I do not identify myself with their image. That is
probably built up from their commercials and perhaps storefronts and when
you see what kind of goods and models they have. I am probably their target
group but it does no attract me.”
A4 (male, 24)
”Om vi tar Pinchos till exempel och man har snackat med andra om vart man
ska gå ut och käka och så, och de flesta föreslår Pinchos har jag ju sagt mer
såhär nej […] Jag tycker att det var lite överreklamerat och de fick det att
framstå som lite bättre än vad det var ansåg jag. Märket i sig kanske det inte
är fel på, eftersom det finns på olika ställen, men just de här att jag har, eller
jag är lite negativt inställd. Av den anledningen hade jag varit mer mån att
prova, om vi ska äta tapas då, att prova på något jag inte känner till. Brist på
service har dem, inte den servicen som man förväntar sig på en restaurang.
Just för att de kör ju mycket på den här appen då.”
“If we take Pinchos for example, and when you have talked to other people
where to go out eating, most people suggest Pinchos, but I have said no […] I
think it is a little overestimated and made it look better than it was, I believe.
Maybe it is not anything wrong with the brand itself, but I have a negative
attitude against it. For that reason, I would rather try, if we are eating
tapas, another restaurant that I do not know of. They have a lack of service,
and not the service that you expect from a restaurant. Mostly because they
are using this app.”
”Västtrafik, när jag ser det, då tänker jag ju genast ”Västtragik”. Just det här
när de skulle satsa på nya banor och sen levererar dem inte, tvärtom det blev
sämre. Det kändes som ett sånt företag som utnyttjar sitt monopol lite. De är
mest negativa erfarenheter.”
61
“Västtrafik, when I see it, I instantly think “Västtragik” (wordplay in
Swedish by replacing the word traffic with tragic). Right when they were
focusing on new connections, they did not deliver, at the opposite it became
worse. It felt like such a company who take advantage of their monopoly a
bit. It is mostly negative experiences.”
”3 skulle jag undvika också, och det har jag inte upplevt själv men det är ju
kanske den här bilden man fått av andra just att dem säger att 3 är kasst. Det
känns lite lömskt, lite lurendrejeri. Då blir det också så att om man har hört
att dem har lovat någonting, så ringer man till kundservice, så får man någon
höftad ursäkt om varför dem inte ska ta ansvar, det är den bilden man har.
Dem står inte för sina misstag eller tar inte sitt ansvar. När jag ser 3 loggan så
tänker jag att det spelar ingen roll vad dem erbjuder, jag hade nog inte litat på
dem ändå. Just för att varumärket representerar någonting som inte tilltalar
mig. Det är nog att märket inte är förknippat med kvalité. Jag identifierar mig
inte med vad det märket representerar.”
“3 would I avoid as well, and it is not something I have experienced myself,
but it is perhaps the picture one has received form others who say that 3 is
lousy. It feels a little sneaky, little like a scam. Then it also becomes like if one
has been promised something and calls support, one get an estimated excuse
about why they should not take responsibility, it is the picture one has. They
do not stand for their mistakes or take their responsibility. When I see the 3
logo I think that it does not matter what they offer, I would never trust them
anyway. They brand represent something that does not attract me. It is
probably that the brand is not associated with quality. I do not identify
myself with what the brand represent.”
”Det är ju också som till exempel om man tittar på Telia Sonera, de hade man
ju inte heller förtroende för efter dem här skandalerna i Azerbajdzjan och
Gibraltar […] Det är lite dem här oetiska sakerna och det känns som att dem i
och med det blir opålitliga. Har ett företag gjort så, då vet man inte vad dem
mer skulle kunna ljuga om. Kan de ljuga för flera miljoner-miljard
bedrägerier, vad ska dem då inte kunna ljuga om för en stackars
studentkund.”
“When looking at Telia Sonera, one did not trust them after the scandals in
Azerbaijan and Gibraltar […] It is those unethical things and it feels like they
get more unreliable because of that. If a company did something like that,
you do not know what they can lie about. If they can lie about frauds worth
millions and billions, what else can they lie about…”
”Om vi snackar flygtjänster då, Flygresor.se kommer jag aldrig i mitt liv
använda. Det är bara för musiken. Man blir ju irriterad på sig själv, den är så
’catchig’ att den fastnar. Det kan hända att det säkert är jättebra. Det är ju hur
varumärket har presenterat sig självt som har resulterat i att jag aktivt säger
nej.”
“If we talk about flight services, I will never use Flygresor.se will I never in
my life. It is only for the music. One get annoyed at oneself, it is catchy, it get
62
stuck. I might be that the music is really good. It is how the company has
presented themselves which has resulted in my active no.”
”Jag vill inte gynna deras konkurrenter oavsett om det inte är inom samma
sektor så vill jag inte vara där. Om Fello hade valt att göra ett
internetabonnemang så hade jag kanske också fått en lite mer hostal
inställning mot konkurrenter just för att man känner lojalitet mot det andra
varumärket. Så jag hade kunnat undvika ett varumärke om jag håller ett annat
kärt, eller lojalt eller har bra uppfattning om osv.”
“I do not want to support the competitors even if it is not the same sector, I
do not want to be there. If Fello had chosen to start doing internet
subscription, maybe I had been more hostile towards the competitors, just
because I feel a loyalty against the other brand. I could avoid a brand if I am
loyal, or a brand that I have a good perception of.”
“Det är säkert finare än Elite hotell men säg att det hade varit dubbelt så dyrt,
så tror jag inte att det hade varit dubbelt så bra i kvalité eller upplevelse och
så.”
“It is probably more nice than Elite Hotel, but let us say that it is twice as
expensive. I do not think it is twice as good in quality and experience.”
A5 (male, 24)
”Netbuss har ju gjort det så bra att dem erbjuder ju en lyxvariant som inte
kostar mer […] Man har alltid valet att kunna resa oerhört bekvämt, medan
Swebus bara har vanliga avgångar. De har inget alternativ så man kan unna
sig lite extra, utan man får alltid samma trånga, obehagliga känsla.”
“Netbus offer a comfort alternative that does not have a higher price […] You
always have the choice to travel more comfortable, while Swebus only have
regular departures. They do not have any alternative where you can treat
yourself, instead you always get the same crowdy, uncomfortable feeling.”
”Till exempel Barbershop, den är ju väldigt maskulin, det är mycket skägg.
Men den ser ju jävligt trevligt ut och det var inte så dyrt där heller så jag var ju
absolut sugen på att klippa mig. Min första känsla var att ’där vill inte jag gå in
och klippa mig, jag känner inte att jag passar in här eller det känns inte som
min typ av människor’. Det är utanför komfortzonen, jag vet inte varför men
man hade bara känt sig obekväm.”
“For instance Barbershop, it is very masculine, there is much beard. But it
looks very nice and it is not very expensive either and I was absolutely eager
to cut my hair. My first feeling was ‘I do not want to go in there and cut my
hair, I do not feel that I fit in there or this do not seem like my type of people’.
It is outside the comfort zone, I do not know why but I had only felt
uncomfortable.”
63
“Jag försöker ju såklart klippa mig så billigt som möjligt, men det finns en
undre gräns precis som det finns en övre gräns […] Jag har sett så många
skräckexempel. Det är en utav de tydligaste man hade kunnat undvika.”
“I try to cut my hair as cheap as possible, but there is a bottom limit just as
there is an upper limit […] I have seen so many bad examples. That is one of
the most obvious things one would avoid.”
”Northlander har väldigt billiga skidresor och man signar upp för att kunna
vinna skidresor. Alltså jag kommer aldrig åka med dem. Jag får mail flera
gånger i veckan. Nu har jag ju visserligen inte tagit steget att trycka
unsubscribe men jag blir ju trött på det här jäkla företaget och det här
halvpersonifierade mailet som man får varje gång från deras VD, Toke eller
vad han heter. Det är ju en sådan grej, jag kan bara tröttna på det. De skapar
väl säkert någon typ av awareness, för jag kommer ju ihåg vad dem hette. Jag
vet precis vad det innehåller, jag missar ingenting när jag trycker delete. Jag
skulle nog påstå att det är en grej man tröttnar på, för ’pushande’ reklam.”
“Northlander has very cheap ski-trips if one signs up to win ski-trips. I will
never travel with them. I get mail several times a week. I have not taken the
step to press unsubscribe but I get tired on that damn company and their
half personal letter from their CEO Toke or what his name is. It is such a
thing, I get tired of it. They are probably creating some kind of awareness
because I remember their name. I know exactly what it contains, I miss
nothing when I press delete. I would suggest that it is a thing one get tired of,
too ‘pushy’ advertising.”
”Typ Justin Bieber, det känns väldigt flickigt och nej det hade jag inte alls
tilltalats av. Det finns väl många liknande… Det hade absolut fått mig att
aktivt inte välja det varumärket om det ska vara deras spokesperson. En sån
som Justin Bieber, han är ju inte vettig person.”
“Like Justin Bieber, it feels very girly and no, that would never appeal to me.
There are probably many similar things. […] It would absolutely make me to
deliberately avoid that brand if he was to be their spokesperson. Someone
like Justin Bieber, he is not a sane person.”
A6 (male, 27)
”3 undviker jag för att jag hade täckning på typ två ställen i hela Sverige
kändes det som så jag kunde gå mitt i Göteborg utan att kunna ringa […] 3
kommer aldrig få bättre täckning än Telia eller Telenor hur dem än gör. Inte
ens om jag får en mobil gratis liksom och betalar hundra spänn i månaden så
kommer jag inte ta dem. Jag tycker verkligen inte om dem.”
“I avoid 3 because I had service on my cell phone on, what it felt like, two
places in Sweden. I could walk in the middle of Gothenburg without being
able to talk […] 3 will never have better service than Telia or Telenor
whatever they do. Not even if I will get a phone for free and have to pay 100
SEK a month, I will not take them. I really do not like them.”
64
A7 (male, 24)
”Det hade absolut kunnat vara en anledning att undvika. Om det finns en
frisörsalong som kostar 100 kr, då känner jag kanske att det är något som inte
stämmer. Det kanske tar en kvart kortare och så kör dem hälften med
rakapparaten. Då betalar man hellre lite mer.”
“If there is a hairdresser that only costs 100 SEK, then I feel that there is
something wrong. Maybe it will take 15 minutes less and they use a shaver
half of the time. Then I rather pay a little bit extra.”
”Det är nog lite identitet också. Sen så är det ju deras image, de har inte så bra
image på marknaden.”
“[…] It is probably identity as well. Also their image, they do not have a good
image on the market […].”
B1 (male, 46)
”När jag flög med SAS till Kinsa senaste, dem hade väl en lågprisvariant, just
planet var gammalt och dåligt, och det ingick ingen dricka eller någonting, då
hade man en förväntan om vad som är praxis för långflygningar och dem
leverarade inte enligt den förväntanivåd, sen var det antagligen efter den
prisklassen bokat, så står det säkert någonstans att det inte ingår, även om
man kan köpa till så levde dem inte upp till förväntansnivå på varken service
eller udnerhållning då.”
“When I flew with SAS to China last time, they had some sort of low price
version. The plane was old and bad, and no beverage or anything was
included. Then you had an expectation of what is common practice for long
flights and they did not deliver giving the expectation. It was probably
because of the price class, it certainly says somewhere that it is not included,
even if you can add that they did not live up to the expectation level, neither
on service or entertainment.”
”Det är nog lättare inom produkter, att man kanske undviker vissa
produktmärken, tjänsterna är nog lite svårare tycker jag.”
“It is probably easier with products, that one may avoid certain product
brands, services are probably a little more difficult in my opinion.”
B2 (female, 52)
”SEMBO, dem undviker jag, eller vi. Det var när vi hyrde en lägenhet i Italien
och vi kom dit och det var helt fruktansvärt, det var ju inte alls som vi sett på
bilder eller trodde utan jättejätte dåligt. Sen när vi kom fram fick ju istället för
att mysa och bada, lägga en dag för att hitta ett nytt boende, vilket vi inte fick
för det fanns inte på hela den orten, sen fick vi när vi kom tillbaka kanske 500
kr. Sen efter det undviker vi SEMBO.”
65
“SEMBO, I avoid them. It was when we rented an apartment in Italy and
when we arrived it was horrible. It was nothing like the picture we had seen
but just really, really bad. When we arrived, instead of cuddling and
sunbathing, we had to search for new accommodation, which we could not
find since the whole town was out of housing. When we got back, we got
maybe 500 SEK. After that we avoid SEMBO.”
”Jag kan känna att även om man hade haft alla pengar i världen så hade man
väl inte flugit med Ryan Air även om det inte spelar mig någon roll idag att
man ska skynda sig och vara ”boskap”, men om jag hade haft alla pengar hade
jag väl valt bort det för att få den servicen man innerst inne vill ha.”
“I can feel that even though I had all the money in the world I would avoid
Ryanair even though it does not matter for me today that you have to hurry
and be treated like ‘cattle’, but if I had all the money in the world I would
avoid it in order to get the service I want deep inside.”
B3 (female 25)
”Då hade jag inte åkt med Ryan Air, för dem är otrevliga och det är jobbigt att
man inte vet vart man ska sitta, eller om man får sitta bredvid varandra och
dem har massa tilläggstjänster hela tiden.”
“They are not very nice and it is annoying that you don’t know where to sit, if
you get to sit next to each other and they have a lot of additional services all
the time.”
”Zalando.se, Dem har jag undvikit väldigt länge på grund av deras jobbiga
reklam, jag hatar den, den är så töntig, dem skriker, jag klarar inte av den.”
”Det är liksom utförandet av reklamen, det känns jobbigt, skrikit. När dem på
reklamen, skjuter ut massa grejer ur brunnar, så sitter en tjej, väldigt
stereotypiskt med att det är en tjej som sitter och shoppar skor och så kommer
det massa skor ur brunnarna.”
“I have avoided Zalando.se for a very long time because of their annoying
commercial, I hate it, it is so lame, they scream, I cannot handle it. […] It is
the execution of the commercial, it feels awkward, screaming. When those on
the commercial shoots out stuff from the wells, there is a girl, very
stereotypical that it is a girl who sits and shops shoes and a lot of shoes are
coming out of the wells.”
B4 (male, 28)
”Jag undviker att flyga med ryan air medvetet för jag litar inte på deras
tjänster pga uttalanden dem har gjort angående säkerhet osv. Jag har flugit
med dem och den gången blev jag strandsatt i skottland och dem ville inte
hjälpa mig överhuvudtaget egetligen så att jag skulle kunna ta mig hem sen,
jag fick boka ett eget flyg till London, och därifrån kunde dem hjälpa mig efter
lite tjat. ”
66
“I avoid flying with Ryan Air consciously since I do not trust their services
because of announcements they have made regarding security etc. I have
flown with them and that time I was stranded in Scotland and they did not
want to help me at all to get home. I had to book my own flight to London,
and from there they could help me after some nagging.”
”Jag hade ju inte flugit med bolag som Ryan Air eller vissa bolag i Asien som
man vet inte är är så jättesäkra utan hade valt ett dyrare alternativ som man
litar på mer.”
“I would not fly with companies like Ryan Air or certain firms in Asia that
you know is not very safe instead choose a more expensive alternative that
you trust more.”
”I media har man ju läst bla att VD:n har gått ut med att han vill ta bort
sittplatser osv. för att det ska få plats mer folk. Man har hört att dem flyger
med bränsle så att dem precis kommer fram till sina destinationer och ibland
får nödlanda, och att piloter ofta är för trötta för att flyga egentligen.”
“In media one have read that the CEO have said that he wants to remove
seats etc. to fit more people. One have heard that they are flying with fuel so
that they just arrive to their destinations and sometimes have to emergency
landing, and that pilots are often too tired to fly.”
”Jag har blivit uppringd om upphandling av el väldigt många gånger av
DINEL i Göteborg eller någonting, dem ringe ju mig varje vecka o tjatade, till
slut sa jag att nu får ni inte ringa mer, jag kommer inte handla el av er”
“I have been called by a company regarding procurement of electricity many
times by Din El in Gothenburg. They called me every week and kept nagging,
finally I said that you cannot call me more, I will not purchase electricity
from you.”
B5 (male, 22)
”Jag försöker undvika COOP i rätt så stor utsträckning, för jag anser att dem
har högre priser än ICA, deras konkurrent, sen har jag också jobbat på ica, så
därför försöker jag alltid undvika coop i så stor utsträckning som möjligt. Jag
undviker coop och willys flr jag känner mig mer familjär med ICA.”
“I am trying to avoid Coop, I believe that they have higher prices than ICA,
their competitor. I have also been working at ICA, so I try to avoid Coop as
much as I can. I avoid Coop and Willys because I am more familiar with
ICA.”
“Om en städfirma använder sig av barn hade gjort att jag inte anställer den
städfirman, för i så fall är det något som pågår här i Sverige med barnarbetet.”
“If a cleaning service uses child labour I would not hire that company, in that
case it is something that is going on with child labour here in Sweden.”
67
B6 (male, 25)
”En del i varför jag undviker Apple är ju deras tjänster. Det är väldigt
nedstängt och kontrollerat, alla deras tjänster är väldigt udda i mina ögon. Det
är väldigt mycket om du väljer deras produkt måste du välja deras tjänster.
Den kopplingen talar ju inte till mig alls, jag vill ju använda det programmet
och den tjänsten jag vill.”
“A part of the reason why I avoid Apple is their services. It is very closed and
controlled, all of their services are very odd in my opinion. It is a lot about
that if you choose their product, you have to choose their services. That
connection is not attractive to me at all. I want to use which programme and
which service I want.”
”När allting började så var det en grej att alla musiksnubbar tjänade massa
pengar igen. Då kände jag direct, tjänar inte de redan tillräckligt? […] Det
hade varit okej om det var en tjänst som satsade på att ta fram mindre kända
artister som inte har en ordentlig inkomst och har svårt att överleva på sin
musik, istället för att ta Nicki Minaj och alla dem som redan är multi
miljonärer på sin musik, då hade det varit en mer intressant tjänst i mina
ögon.”
“When everything started it was a thing that the music dudes earned a lot of
money again. I immediately felt, do they not earn enough money
already? […] It would have been okay if it was a service with focus on
smaller artists, instead of taking Nicki Minaj and all of the people that
already are multimillionaires on their music, then it would have been a more
interesting service in my opinion.”
”Men det blir ett I-lands tänk, om du bor i ett land där folk inte har pengar
från början, så blir det att ‘ja jag förtjänar det här’ medans i Sverige blir det
att ‘oj, ska jag verkligen göra sånt’.”
“It will be a first world issue. If you live in a country where people do not
have money from the start, it will be like ‘okay I deserve this’, while in
Sweden it is more ‘wow, should I really do something like this’.”
B7 (male 25)
”Jag har haft dåliga erfarenheter av halebop, för jag vet att jag hade det en
gång och deras kundservice och hur dem, det kändes som om dem hade dragit
ner på det enda man behövde, dem hade inte riktigt förstått kundvärdet torr
jag, för oftast har man inte så mycket kontakt med sina mobilleverantörer
utan man bara använder dem dagligen så får det funka, men när det inte
funkar vill man ha snabb och bra hjälp.”
“I have had negative experiences with Halebop, I know that I had Halebop
once. Their customer service, it felt like they had cut down on the only
essential, they had not realised the customer value I think. Most of the time
you do not have a lot of contact with your your mobile operator, but you use
68
it daily. However, when it does not work, you want quick and good help, so I
would never get Halebop actually.”
”När jag vill göra saker privat så tittar jag på tjänster där jag vet att de är bra
på att behandla privatkunder. Det känns so matt när jag ser DHL eller
Schenker väljer jag aldrig dem för att det känns som att det är riktigt till
företag. Jag skulle vilja säga att jag undviker schenker pga att jag har lite svårt
att associera mig med schenker pga att enda sedan man var liten har man haft
posten, posten är ju en stor del av ens liv, det är dem som leverar breven och
det är dem som leverar paketen, dem kan jag associera mig med. Samtidigt
som Schenker kan jag varken associera mig med som någon som bidragit till
mig elelr som jag är en kund hos egentligen.”
“When I want to do things privately then I look for companies of services
where I know that they are good at treating private customers. It feels like
when I see DHL or Schenker I never chose them because it feels like that is
towards companies. […] I would like to say that I avoid Schenker because I
have a hard time associating myself with Schenker. Because ever since I was
a child I have used Posten, Posten is big part of my life, it is they who deliver
the letters and it is them who deliver the packages, I can associate myself
with them. At the same time cannot associate myself with Schenker as
company who has contributed to me nor someone I am a customer to
actually.”
”Jag skulle ju även fast dem här lågpris mobiloperatörerna är tillgängliga och
dem är med i beräkningarna när man ska köpa telefoner så väljer jag dem
aldrig, till exempel Hallon, Halebop. De undviker jag aktivt även fast dem
förmodligen hade varit lika bra och gett mig bättre pris.”
“Even though the low price mobile operators are available, and those are
included in the calculations when buying a new phone, I never choose them.
For instance, Hallon and Halebop. I actively avoid them even though they
probably would have been just as good but for a better price.”
”Ett annat exempel för mig är skolor när det började bli så otroligt många
privat skolor ute i sverige och hur jag vet och hörde av mina vänner hur det är
på privat skolorna, hur betygen skjöt i höjden. Får jag gå om gymnasiet och
även om det skulle generera mig bättre betyg så hade inte jag valt, THOREN
BUSINESS SCHOOL eller JOHN BAUER, utan jag hade undvikit dem. För jag
tycker inte att det sättet som det bedrivs, det är ju verkligen på bekostnad av
andra, det märker man ju hr det ser ut nu, alla har ju skyhöga betyg när dem
söker och jag är ju övertygad om att folk är inte mer intelligenta nu än för 10
år sedan.”
“An example for me is education, when it started to become so many private
schools in Sweden and I heard from my friends how the grades soared. Even
if it would generate better grades, I would not have chosen Thoren Business
School or John Bauer, I avoid them. The way the schools are conducted, it is
really at the expense of others. You can tell that when you see how it is today,
people have really high grades when they apply for universities, and I am
convinced that people are not smarter now than 10 years ago.”
69
”Det är lättare på produkter.”
“It is easier on products.”
“Socialdemokraterna använde sig av Henrik Schyffert tror jag det var, vilket
som för mig framstod som otroligt oseriös och o businessminded. Vilket
också för mig jag associerar med socialdemokraterna, inte bara att det var en
komiker utan också att han äger en takvåning i centrala Stockholm.”
“Socialdemokraterna used Henrik Schyffert, I believe it was, which to me
appeared as incredible non-serious and business minded. Which I now
associate Socialdemokraterna with, not only that he was a comedian, but
also that he owns a penthouse in central Stockholm.”
B8 (male 24)
”Ryan Air, två eller tre orsaker, ett för att jag har åkt med dem, otroligt dåligt
benutrymme, det kändes otrevligt. Hemsidan, upplägget med att det ser
väldigt billigt ut och sedan kommer extrakostnaderna. Också rykterna och det
man har läst om dem, både medias bild och kompisar, jag tänker på en
kompis då vars far är flygkapten på SAS.”
“I would avoid Ryan Air for two or three causes. Firstly, because I have
travelled with them, incredibly bad legroom, it did not feel nice. The website,
the arrangement that it look really cheap and then the additional costs. Also
the rumours and the things you have read about them, both medias picture
and friends, I am thinking about a friend whose father is an airline captain
at SAS.”
“Jag var på resa, blev rånad, kom hem och hade det försäkringsbolaget […]
Jag fick kliva ner på det lokala kontoret vilket är bra att dem har, men jag
skull ha med mig pass och visa att jag hade varit i dem här länderna, var
otroligt mycket krångel, skulle försöka bevisa att jag hade dem här cashen och
kvitto på mobilen. Det var en otrolig bevis börda för mig. Jämför då med hur
det gick för min kompis som kunde glassa runt o vara kung på krogen med
dem här oengarna så fick jag slita otroligt mycket mer. Den upplevelsen gjorde
att jag fick byta bolag.”
“I was on a vacation, got robbed, got home and used that insurance
company […] I had to go to the local office, which was good that they had,
but I had to bring my passport and show that I had been in those countries.
It was a lot of hassle. I had to prove how much money I had and receipts on
my cell phone. It was an incredible burden to me. My friend with another
insurance company could cruise around, while I had to make so much more
effort. That experience made me change company.”
”Plus att jag kände att jag tyckte att tjänsten även om alla har den och jag har
hört säkert ett tiotal personer säga ”såg du det här på snapchat”, ”jag skicka
den till dig på snapchat”. Så har jag ingen motivation att använda det ändå,
det knns roligare att uppleva saker tillsammans istället och kanske är roligare
70
att ringa ett samtal än att olla på 50 snapchats. Att man inte lever sitt eget liv
utan kollar vad alla andra gör hela tiden.”
“I felt that the service, even if everyone uses it and I have heard about ten
people say ‘did you see this on Snapchat?’ and ‘I send it to you on Snapchat’, I
do not have a motivation to use it anyway, it feels more fun to experience
things together instead [...] You do not live your own life but look for what
others do all the time.”
”Om man står mellan två olika alternativ när man ska boka flyg så tycker man
att den är så otroligt töntig, den där flyg, flyg flygresor.se och några jävla
katter som hoppar runt, då kanske man känner att den är oseriös. Då kanske
man väljer en annat företag. Jag tycker att flygresors reklam är töntigt, jag har
betällt ett gäng flygresoroch då har jag aldrig använt föygresor.se. Dem känns
lite oseriösa, det är katter som hoppar runt på ett bord, nu blir jag fan
förbannad.”
“If one has to choose between two different alternatives when booking a
flight, and you think that it is incredible dorky, that one, Flyg, Flyg,
Flygresor.se and some damn cats jumping around, then one might
experience it as non-serious. Then you might choose another company. I
think that Flygresor.se’s commercial is dorky. I have ordered a bunch of
flights and I have never used Flygresor.se. They feel non-serious and there
are cats jumping around on a table, now I get pissed off.
71
Appendix 4 – Interview Audiofiles
Audiofiles from interviews available on request.
72